[Dwarf-Discuss] C++14 and C++03 (vs C++98)

Mark Wielaard mjw at redhat.com
Tue Dec 2 03:46:26 PST 2014


On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 07:36 -0800, Michael Eager wrote:
> On 11/26/14 02:23, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Looks like Tom's reply never made the dwarf mailinglist.
> > So here it is to make the archive on this issue complete.
> >
> > On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 09:02 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >> Michael> Issue 120628.1 mentions a need to distinguish between C++03 and other
> >> Michael> versions of C++.  If you believe that DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03 is not
> >> Michael> necessary, I suggest that you discuss this with the submitter, Tom
> >> Michael> Tromey, to understand why he believes that this is required.
> >>
> >> Mark & I discussed it and I couldn't remember any reason that this was
> >> needed.
> >>
> >> Tom
> 
> Please submit a comment to remove the language code:
> http://dwarfstd.org/Comment.php

I don't believe Tom uses that email address anymore. I have CCed the
address he tried to use to post to the list. Just in case Tom didn't
yet, I have added a clarification request (see below). But didn't get a
issue number yet. Note that Jakub also said he added a request for
Fortran language version constants that also hasn't shown up on the
website.

BTW. That page says it is for DWARF Version 4 Standard issues. Not for
DWARFv5 drafts. I have been using the following draft for prototyping
some new things http://www.dwarfstd.org/doc/dwarf5.20141029.pdf
I don't know if that is the latest version. Or when the committee
expects feedback on the DWARFv5 draft document. I haven't had time to
read the whole document yet. It would be nice to have a date/deadline
before when feedback on the DWARFv5 draft should be given.

Thanks,

Mark

Subject:  DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03 clarification
Name:  Mark Wielaard
Email:  mjw at redhat.com
Section:  3.1.1  Page:  57
Type:  Clarification

The DWARFv5 draft document
http://www.dwarfstd.org/doc/dwarf5.20141029.pdf in Section 3.1.1, Normal
and Partial Compilation Unit Entries, contains Table 3.1: Language names
which has an entry for DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03 ISO C++:2003. The same
constant can be found in 7.12 Source Languages as Table 7.17: Language
encodings.

As discussed on the DWARF mailinglist
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.standards.dwarf/218 it is unclear
when a DWARF producer should use that language constant, or what a DWARF
consumer can expect when that language constant is used since C++03 does
not change the language in any way from C++98 represented by
DW_LANG_c_plus_plus.

Is DW_LANG_c_plus_plus_03 constant is actually needed? And if adopted by
DWARFv5, how should a producer and consumer need to interpret it?


More information about the Dwarf-Discuss mailing list