On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 08:30:48AM -0700, David Blaikie via Dwarf-discuss wrote:
> I believe the intent is that version numbers are able to be compared
> numerically.
>
> In any case, they are numbers per https://dwarfstd.org/issues/210419.1.html
> - "A DW_AT_language_version attribute may be specified whose constant value
> is an integer code indicating the version of the source language."
Yeah. Strings are more expensive than just numbers (which can be done
through DW_FORM_implicit_const) and for strings you'd need some agreed way
how to compare what is newer and what is older.
strverscmp, rpmvercmp, ... (many choices, what is the right segmented string
comparison)?
If you have a language that uses more than 2 digit minor or patchlevel
versions, either you need to stay at 99 or when adding the language
go for VVVMMMPPP versioning scheme instead.
Jakub
--
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
