I figured out what DW_OP_EXT prefix means in DWAF6, and I suppose a legitimate (invented as example) for a name in the DW_OP_user_extended namespace might be DW_OP_EXT_GNU_random (with value) 0x12 Is that what is meant? So maybe fix the existing references?
Seems to me a trivial example would clarify when we are referring to NAME or VALUE. A few examples with table name and the header line of the table follow: Table 7.19: Calling convention encodings Calling convention name Value Table 7.11: Base type encoding values Base type encoding name Values Table 7.11: Base type encoding values Base type encoding name Value Table 7.9 DWARF operation encodings Operation Code. No. o Operands Notes The document has always been a bit inconsistent about name vs value in the tables. I would suggest that for nearly all such tables the table name should use 'name' rather than 'encoding' Does anyone think there is a benefit to modifying table definitions so the index entries have 'name' instead of 'encodings' ?? Would a proposal on either of these observations seem appropriate? David A. -- Dwarf-discuss mailing list Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
