[Dwarf-Discuss] Using DWARF for C++ runtime reflection

[Michael Eager]

>         Yes, assuming that the compiler generates a valid source type. 
>         In some
>         cases, particularly with template classes, this may not be the case.
> 
> 
>      ?So DWARF does not give any guarantees and it's up to compiler
>     vendor to decide about DW_AT_name?
> 
> 
> DWARF doesn't give guarantees, just suggestions. Practically speaking 
> there's certainly benefit to compilers ensuring they produce a 
> consistent name across different translation units - and potentially 
> even a consistent name across compilers (so that code built with 
> different compilers and then debugged can behave consistently/well). (or 
> consistent enough for a debugger to cope with it - but I think as Daniel 
> pointed out, having the debugger have to decompose the name and do 
> various type equivalences is painful - which might lean one towards 
> trying to produce more consistent names across GCC and Clang - the few 
> cases I know of (enums, for example) could probably be improved just for 
> the compiler self-consistency aspect and incidentally improve the cross 
> compiler consistency anyway)

Exactly.  In many areas, the DWARF Standard is permissive.  There are
specific constraints which are mentioned, but the producer is given a
lot of latitude whether to generate complete or incomplete, good or poor
DWARF.  DWARF guarantees the organization and structure of the data.

There is a comment about names on the DWARF Wiki under Best Practices:
http://wiki.dwarfstd.org/index.php?title=Best_Practices


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