[Dwarf-Discuss] DW_TAG_base_type must have DW_AT_name?
Roland McGrath
roland@redhat.com
Wed Oct 27 17:03:25 GMT 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.
Thanks,
Roland
More information about the Dwarf-discuss
mailing list