On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 12:11 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > I was looking at the D.4 Member Function Example and noticed it flags > member functions that don't return a value with a DW_AT_type pointing to > a DW_TAG_unspecified_type with name "void". I haven't encountered > producers that do this and it seems 5.5.7 Member Function Entries imply > that DW_TAG_subprogram member function DIEs follow the same rules as > non-member DW_TAG_subprogram function DIEs. Where 3.3.2 says: > > If the subroutine or entry point is a function that returns a > value, then its debugging information entry has a DW_AT_type > attribute to denote the type returned by that function. > > Debugging information entries for C void functions should not > have an attribute for the return type. > > Was the example intended to show that a void function that doesn't > return a value could still have a DW_AT_type and that it should point to > a "void" DW_TAG_unspecified_type (are there producers out there which > encode void member functions this way)? Or is it just an unfortunate > example that doesn't represent the best practice of what the spec > intended for no return value member functions? I can submit a > clarification request in that case.
I think it is just an unfortunate example. I have submitted the following clarification request to http://dwarfstd.org/Comment.php Subject: D.4 Member Function Example wrong return type Name: Mark Wielaard Email: m...@redhat.com Section: D.4 Page: 235 Type: Clarification As discussed on the DWARF discuss list: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.standards.dwarf/142 The D.4 Member Function Example flags member functions that don't return a value with a DW_AT_type pointing to a DW_TAG_unspecified_type with name "void". This is wrong because the functions don't actually return a "void", they don't return a value at all and so according to section 3.3.2 they should not have a DW_AT_type at all. Suggested change: In Figure 59. Member function example: DWARF description remove the DW_AT_type(reference to 1$) from the 7$, 10$ and 12$ DW_TAG_subprograms for func1, func2 and func3. _______________________________________________ Dwarf-Discuss mailing list Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
