dwblaikie wrote: > > > Should not we remove constant initializer from the type definition if we > > > have a DW_TAG_variable with a DW_AT_const_value now? > > > > > > Yep, +1 to this. This is where the type normalization benefit would come > > from - no longer having this const value on the member declaration, but > > only on the definition. > > Makes sense. I'll create a separate PR for that, unless people are fine with > doing that as part of this change
If it's not too much code might make sense to do it as part of this change - so the size impacts are more clear, for instance. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/70639 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
