Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Representing captured `this` in C++ lambdas

On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 3:15 PM Cary Coutant wrote: > Whichever way we want to go, it sounds like the DWARF spec should provide the > necessary guidance. This looks like a good start to a proposal—Kyle, would > you like to write one? (See https://dwarfstd.org/comment.html.) I will write somethi

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Representing vtables in DWARF for downcasting

I've written a three-part proposal to address these issues: - The first part, 250506.1 , proposes a standard mechanism for locating the virtual function table (vtable) given an object of a polymorphic class. - The second part, 250506.2

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] DWARF on vintage CPUs

Thanks, John and Simon, for sharing your knowledge. Seems like the DW_AT_producer string would be useful for MAME, as it's unlikely MAME would be able to interpret any DWARF that wasn't specifically written for it. As for the 6811, yes... a while back I found this page: https://refspecs.linux

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] DWARF on vintage CPUs

On 5/5/25 6:31 PM, David Broman via Dwarf-discuss wrote: > Thanks for the information. > > > > There are unofficial patches to both gcc and gdb to support 6809. Neither of > them support DWARF. I don't know much about these old CPUs, but it looks like GDB supports the 6811, and the source fi

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] DWARF on vintage CPUs

Inline... On 5/5/25 18:31, David Broman wrote: Thanks for the information. There are unofficial patches to both gcc and gdb to support 6809. Neither of them support DWARF. As you said, MAME could in theory just come up with a register mapping, and compiler writers (e.g., CMOC for 6809) would