On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw the following issue which proposed DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03 and
> DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_11. It appears to have been accepted for DWARF4
> according to this page:
> http://www.dwarfstd.org/Issues.php?type=closed3
> But apparently did
FWIW I fully agree with this line of reasoning. I was going to propose
it as well (though not as comperhensively) since we may decide that we
want to use something other than "the low 64-bits of an md5 hash" to
represent the file. Speaking of which, the particular hash and such
should be explicitly
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been pondering the various aranges proposals and how they
> interact with the change to merge the units proposal. It looks like the
> intent of two proposals is diminished by two other proposals.
>
> To make it possible to quick
As a quick note, you're aware that Windows in general doesn't use dwarf
right?
-eric
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:26 AM Vincent Torri
wrote:
> Hello
>
> I have begun to write a valgrind-like on Windows, and I use libbfd to
> get the stack trace (file, function and line of a frame).
>
> I would li
wrote:
> afaik, gnu windows toolchain stores debug informations in DWARF
> format. Am I wrong ?
>
> Vincent Torri
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Eric Christopher
> wrote:
> > As a quick note, you're aware that Windows in general doesn't use dwarf
> &g
No, it implies you were using bfd to read dwarf, nothing else.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 9:22 PM Vincent Torri wrote:
> Hello
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Eric Christopher
> wrote:
> > You didn't specify what compiler you were using to build the debug
> s
rks, you're absolutely of no
> help
> and i doubt you can compile binutils with vc++
> that's my last answer to you
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Eric Christopher
> wrote:
> > No, it implies you were using bfd to read dwarf, nothing else.
> &
FWIW you can use cmake to compile LLVM for windows with a VS project
output. It has a support library for reading dwarf sections, but you may
need to do a little bit of work to make sure it can understand the object
file reading it if it isn't just a plain ELF file.
Feel free to follow up with me
On Tue, May 17, 2016, 1:30 AM Ane wrote:
> Eric Christopher writes:
>
> >
> >
> > FWIW you can use cmake to compile LLVM for windows with a VS project
> output. It has a support library for reading dwarf sections, but you may
> need to do a little bit of work to m
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 2:56 PM John DelSignore <
john.delsign...@roguewave.com> wrote:
> On 02/03/17 17:29, David Anderson wrote:
> > On 02/03/2017 12:21 PM, John DelSignore wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've been poking around looking for Split DWARF producers. As far as I
> >> can tell, no compiler
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
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
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.
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, 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_
"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
16 matches
Mail list logo
