Yeah, I'm good either way - describing the artificiality of object_pointer as optional, or removing that entirely & leaving that up to consumers to use as needed. I think I'd lean towards removing the wording & leaving it up to users to decide what's artificial and what isn't.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 2:54 AM Michael Buch via Dwarf-discuss < dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote: > # DW_AT_object_pointer: clarify wording around implicit versus > explicit object parameters > > ## Background > > With C++23 we got the ability to explicitly spell out in source the > object parameter of a class method [1]. The object parameter for such > methods is not compiler-generated and is explicitly named by the user. > The wording of the current DWARF spec assumes object parameters are > implicit and specifies that those parameters be marked > DW_AT_artificial, despite them not falling into the category for > "artificial" parameters. > > Other examples of languages with explicit object parameters are Python and > Rust. > > Recently Clang started emitting DW_AT_object_pointer for explicit > object parameters but decided not to mark them artificial [2][3]. > > ## Overview > > This proposal adjusts the wording in the DWARF spec to clarify that > explicit DW_AT_object_parameter's might not be marked > DW_AT_artificial. > > ## Proposed Changes > > In chapter "5.7.8 Member Function Entries", change the mention of > `DW_AT_artificial` in the last sentence as follows: > > [ORIGINAL TEXT] > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > If the member function entry describes a non-static member function, > then that entry has a DW_AT_object_pointer attribute whose value is a > reference to the formal parameter entry that corresponds to the object > for which the function is called. The name attribute of that formal > parameter is defined by the current language (for example, this for > C++ or self for Objective C and some other languages). That parameter > also has a DW_AT_artificial attribute whose value is true. > [NEW TEXT] > ========== > If the member function entry describes a non-static member function, > then that entry has a DW_AT_object_pointer attribute whose value is a > reference to the formal parameter entry that corresponds to the object > for which the function is called. The name attribute of that formal > parameter is defined by the current language (for example, this for > C++ or self for Objective C and some other languages). Many languages > make the object pointer an implicit parameter with no syntax. In that > case the parameter should have a DW_AT_artificial attribute whose > value is true. > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Alternatively we could just omit any mention of DW_AT_artificial. And > we might want to add some informative text about C++23's explicit > object parameters. > > ## References > > * [1]: > https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/member_functions#Explicit_object_member_functions > * [2]: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122897 > * [3]: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122928 > -- > Dwarf-discuss mailing list > Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org > https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss >
-- Dwarf-discuss mailing list Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
