[llvm-dev] Should DISubprogram's scope be allowed to be null?

[Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev]

> On 2016-Jan-18, at 10:57, Keno Fischer <kfischer at college.harvard.edu> wrote:
> 
> In the patch comments I suggested adding a separate named metadata node to root compile units that you want in the IR, but not emitted into the binary. I assume that would work for you?
> 
> Duncan, do you like that approach?

SGTM.

> 
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:24 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
> Diego: To include line/col info for backend diagnostics, we produced debug info but omitted the llvm.dbg.cu entry, right? So there are subprogram debug info descriptions that are not referenced from a CU in llvm.dbg.cu, yes?
> 
> Yes, that and for sample PGO.  Omitting llvm.dbg.cu prevents codegen from emitting all that debug info to the final binary.
>