I'd like to ask for some clarification relating to DW_AT_entry_pc. Here
is the relevant section from the DWARF-5 spec for reference:
2.18 Entry Address
The entry or first executable instruction generated for an entity, if
applicable, is often the lowest addressed instruction of a cont
On 9/30/24 11:30, Adrian Prantl via Dwarf-discuss wrote:
> ## Proposed Changes
>
> ### Table 2.1
> add `DW_TAG_property`.
>
> ### 5.7.6 add the following normative text
>
> `DW_TAG_property`
>
> Non-normative: Many object-oriented languages like Pascal and Objective-C
> have properties, which
Hi Kyle,
Apologies for the delay, this fell off my radar! The reality is a bit more
complicated to what was described in a previous email in this thread.
> When stepping from point 1 to point 2, the breakpoint on the post-await
> funclet at point 2 has to be conditional on being on the async_co
Hi Andrew,
I agree that the language could be tidied up here, but I'm confident that a
lookup of the "containing scope" ought to start with the DIE itself.
Normally any DIE describing a code entity (function, lexical block, unit)
would itself have a low_pc/high_pc pair or DW_AT_ranges; if it doesn
