[Dwarf-Discuss] DW_FORM_data1 and DW_AT_const_value

Roland McGrath roland at redhat.com
Mon Jul 26 15:37:38 PDT 2010


> There is a distinction between "ambiguous" and "unspecified".
> The interpretation of the value of DW_FORM_data is unspecified.
> I don't believe that there is any ambiguity.

What I said was ambiguous was what the implications of that italicized
(non-normative) paragraph were.  I take it you are saying that it's
unambiguous in that paragraph that DW_FORM_data* interpretation is
unspecified, and therefore unambiguous that the paragraph implies nothing
about that interpretation.  Is that what you meant?

> > I think it's wise (and is manifest existing practice) to use
> > DW_FORM_data[124] freely and be clear that they imply zero-extension.
> 
> That is not the interpretation described in the DWARF standard.

You just said that the standard does not specify an interpretation.


Thanks,
Roland



More information about the Dwarf-Discuss mailing list