[PATCH] D29833: Improve the API of DILocation::getMergedLocation()

[Paul Robinson via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

probinson added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D29833#682595, @twoh wrote:

> I don't have strong opinion about scope, because anyway we won't be able to have precise scope. Taking DISubprogram of the destination instruction might be a conservative option.


Mmmm...  Does scope imply source file?  LTO can inline across CUs, then merging an instruction from CU#1 into a scope from CU#2 would make the line number meaningless.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D29833