Re: A couple of things that I think should be in byte bytecode meta comments

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Rocky Bernstein <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:55:06 -0500
> Cc: address@hidden
> 
> That there is also a SHA of  the text. If the text in any of those 60 files 
> is identical it doesn't matter for purposes
> of debugging and error location determination which one
> in the set you decide to call the source. 

If there's a SHA, why do we also need a file name?

>  I'm saying that the minuscule amount of times it will work will drown
>  in the sea of times it won't.  Worse, when it "doesn't work", it will
>  many times produce a false alarm: the file name is different, but the
>  contents was identical. 
> 
> If that's the case, then how is this different than what we have now? 

If it isn't different, why add the recording of file names?  It does
nothing to improve the situation.