[PATCH] D55091: Add --analyze option to llvm-dwarfdump

[David Blaikie via llvm-commits]

I'd vote for it going in libDebugInfo and being visible from both tools -
to improve discoverability. (at least I think a section-level breakdown
starts to feel like an objdump feature - and it'd be weird to have to
switch between the two tools, etc).

I'm wind Vedant also on having diff support, same as bloaty (looks like
we're going down the road of basically implementing that sort of
functionality in LLVM) - but that's a feature request, not something that
blocks development on other features, etc.

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:57 PM Greg Clayton via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> clayborg added a comment.
>
> So do we have a consensus where the --analyze option should go?
> llvm-dwarfdump or llvm-objdump?
>
>
> CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
>   https://reviews.llvm.org/D55091/new/
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D55091
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20181130/6457ba88/attachment.html>