"This margin is too narrow to contain..." ;)
I'd like to see the doc - it's easy to believe we've gotten something wrong
here.. Might be good to fix this as textual edits rather than waiting on a
full dwarf standard release because we're going to run into this a lot if
we can't get it sorted quick
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 5:37 PM David Blaikie wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 3:44 PM Cary Coutant wrote:
>
>> >> > Yep - unless someone has significant objections my plan is currently:
>> >> >
>> >> > Emit a v5 index with extension/non-standard extra column indexes
>> (specifically: DW_SECT_
Hi Paul,
I too remember this discussion and clang's implementation is how I saw this
being added when we did.
-eric
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:34 AM Robinson, Paul via Dwarf-Discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
> Hmmm.
>
> When the committee was reworking the file/dir tables for D
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:55 AM Michael Eager via Dwarf-Discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
> On 09/24/2018 09:19 AM, Robert Harris via Dwarf-Discuss wrote:
> >> But in general, yes, any DWARF expression that contains a DW_OP_addr
> might need a relocation for its address argument.
Dwarf 5, 7.3.1
"A DWARF expression may contain a DW_OP_addr (see Section 2.5.1.1 on 31
page 26) which contains a location within the virtual address space of the
32 program, and require relocation."
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:35 AM Robert Harris via Dwarf-Discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.or
I have nothing to add to what Paul just said :)
This is definitely the intent and what we should do.
-eric
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:26 AM Paul Robinson via Dwarf-Discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
> The intent of the index is given pretty plainly in the non-normative text
> at
