[Dwarf-Discuss] DW_TAG_base_type must have DW_AT_name?
Michael Eager
eager@eagercon.com
Wed Oct 27 20:32:11 GMT 2010
Kendrick Wong wrote:
> In section 5.1, does the specification mean that DW_TAG_base_type *must*
> have a DW_AT_name or it *can* have a DW_AT_name?
> The name attribute makes sense for language like C/C++, but I'm not sure
> how it applies to language like COBOL, where the type name is implied in
> the picture string:
> i.e.
> MYEDIT PIC ABBA(5)
>
> this generates a variable MYEDIT, which points to a base type with
> DW_AT_encoding(DW_ATE_edited). The type itself really has no name.
>
> FYI.. here is the wordings In section 5.1:
>
> "A base type is represented by a debugging information entry with the
> tag DW_TAG_base_type.
>
> A base type entry *has* a DW_AT_name attribute whose value is a
> null-terminated string containing the name of the base type as
> recognized by the programming language of the compilation unit
> containing the base type entry.
>
> ...
>
> A base type entry *may* have a DW_AT_endianity attribute as described in
> Section 4.1. If omitted, the encoding assumes the representation that is
> the default for the target architecture."
Please submit a proposal to adopt the relaxed wording.
--
Michael Eager eager at eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077
More information about the Dwarf-discuss
mailing list