[Dwarf-Discuss] Default Location List Entry Issue 130121.1

[Michael Eager]

On 04/22/14 03:57, Mark Wielaard wrote:

> Assuming the consumer is interested in "the object is not available for
> the portion of the range that is not covered" property of the location
> list then it looks like if the producer uses a default location list
> entry that information is no longer available. Because a default
> location list entry describes both the duplicate valid ranges and the
> invalid ranges at the same time.
 >
> So if a producer wants to take advantage of a default location list
> entry to encode a smaller location list for an object, then how should
> it present to the consumer the same "not available" information?

I think that this is an unusual situation.  Can you describe when this
might be the case?

The most reasonable thing to do is not generate a default location.
If there is no default location which applies at all addresses which
are not specified in the location list, then generating a default
location doesn't make much sense.

An alternate might be to include a location list entry for the range
where the object is not available and have that contain a zero-length
location list.  That would be non-standard, but I think that any
consumer would reasonable interpret this as location not available.

-- 
Michael Eager	 eager at eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306  650-325-8077