dyung wrote: > > The member is const with an initializer in-class. How is the constant value > > not available for the definition? > > Right, it is available, we just don't attach it if we have a location for it. > Don't see why we couldn't put it on the definition if we have the constant on > hand
So I guess what you are saying in this case is that it is expected and the value is at the location indicated by the DW_AT_location value? As long as the value is still available I suppose that is fine then and the test just needs updating. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71780 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
