[Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Ron Brender]

Cary,

>DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the list
was out of order, so when I assigned >DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked like
0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to reassign
>DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.

I think it would be safer to just leave well-enough alone. I just updated
the document to match the website (and make DW_LNAME_HIP = 0x0029). So any
change causes work for me. Similarly it creates work for anyone who is
actually trying to use code DW_LNAME_Assembly. Why bother?

Ron




On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 12:25 PM Cary Coutant <ccoutant@gmail.com> wrote:

> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got
>> incorporated into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication).
>> Perhaps because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved.
>> That status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
>>
>> Anyway, I'll fix it for V6.
>>
>> The next available code is 0x0027. What makes you think the code should
>> be 0x0029?
>>
>>
>> I was looking at https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html where the last
>> assigned langiage is DW_LNAME_Hylo 0x0028.
>>
>
> DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the list
> was out of order, so when I assigned DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked like
> 0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to reassign
> DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.
>
> -cary
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss/attachments/20240424/b608d32e/attachment.htm>