Hi, I was adding the underlying type to an enumeration in a DWARF producer (GCC) and wanted to drop the DW_AT_byte_size in case we have such an underlying DW_AT_type. Since it looks redundant in that case. The DW_AT_byte_size of the DW_TAG_enumeration should be equal to the size of the underlying type if given. Or am I missing some subtle case were that isn't/cannot be so?
But the language of 5.7 Enumeration Type Entries isn't so clear that can be done. Although it says "may have a DW_AT_type attribute", it does imply that a DW_AT_byte_size must be given (by not saying "may"): "This entry also has a DW_AT_byte_size attribute". Am I reading that too strictly? Or should I propose wording to make clear that the DW_AT_byte_size is optional if a DW_AT_type has been given (and only drop the redundant DW_AT_byte_size for DWARF5+ if such wording is accepted)? I did check with at least one consumer (libabigail) that dropping the DW_AT_byte_size would require some code updates, but they were not opposed to just doing that. Thanks, Mark _______________________________________________ Dwarf-Discuss mailing list Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
