[Dwarf-Discuss] DW_TAG_base_type must have DW_AT_name?
roland at redhat.com
Wed Oct 27 10:03:25 PDT 2010
By the general wording of DWARF, I think it is moderately clear that
something should only have a DW_AT_name if there is a single
source-language identifier that names the entity (in this case, the type).
If not, there should be no DW_AT_name. But, as you say, such a case is
exactly why DW_AT_description exists--a useful indication for humans of
what the entity is there for, but not a literal source-language name for it.
More information about the Dwarf-Discuss