[Dwarf-discuss] Proposal to encode Changed Function Signatures in dwarf

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Hi -

> > But folks here are pushing back by suggesting that that optimized
> > calling convention may not be representable in the source
> > language? which I think is accurate/fair...

> Could you clarify here? In the compiler, we can capture the changed
> signature. BTW, currently we only target the C language as it is our
> use case.

Only targeting C doesn't matter.  An optimized copy of a function
that's emitted for only intra-CU use need not entertain the standard
parameter location scheme (ABI).  It may get parameters put into
whatever random locations the compiler finds helpful for that very
spot.  

It will emit a location list to help a debugger find them.  However,
those random location assignments need not match those from any other
C code.  Your "changed function signature" terminology is misleading.
"signature" is relevant to an ABI-compliant function, not to an
optimized private piece of code that's not reachable from an ABI
interface.

- FChE