[Dwarf-discuss] PROPOSAL DW_FORM_implicit_const

[Cary Coutant]

Thanks. I've added this as Issue 250422.1.

https://dwarfstd.org/issues/250422.1.html

Would we want to delete the following paragraph? Quite possibly yes,
there is little reason to suggest repetition is a good idea.

 >If the actual attribute form is itself `DW_FORM_indirect`,
 >the indirection repeats.  There may be one or more
 >occurrences of `DW_FORM_indirect` in sequence until a
 >`non-DW_FORM_indirect` form is reached. The sequence of
 >`DW_FORM_indirect` forms does not have any effect other than
 >to use up space.

I support removing that paragraph. There is no good reason to support a
chain of indirects, and I think it's just asking for trouble.

-cary


On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 1:23 PM David Anderson <davea42@linuxmail.org>
wrote:

> On 4/23/25 11:25, Cary Coutant wrote:
> > David,
> >
> >     As part of this, we rearrange
> >     the references from
> >     `DW_FORM_implicit_const`, `DW_FORM_addrx`, and `DW_FORM_indirect`
> >     to be listed in the order
> >     `DW_FORM_addrx`, `DW_FORM_implicit_const`, and `DW_FORM_indirect`.
> >
> >
> >     `DW_FORM_addrx` is not part of the proposal so
> >     we keep it separate (just preceding)
> >     `DW_FORM_implicit_const` and `DW_FORM_indirect`.
> >
> >
> > Did you mean DW_FORM_addrx_offset where you wrote DW_FORM_addrx here?
> >
> > -cary
>
> Oops. Yes. DW_FORM_addrx_offset.  New in DWARF6.
> DavidA
>
> --
> Space is to place as eternity is to time.
> -- Joseph Joubert
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss/attachments/20250423/3f7ee80a/attachment.htm>