From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22275 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2005 16:35:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 22210 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Nov 2005 16:35:13 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 16:35:12 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jALGYo6d026965; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:34:50 -0500 Received: from lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (lacrosse.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.154]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jALGYoV24748; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:34:50 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jALGYn428165; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:34:49 -0500 Message-ID: <4381F707.5080703@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:02:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: Wu Zhou , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pinskia@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Use DW_CC_program to indicate Fortran main subroutine References: <20051121051017.GA12030@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20051121051017.GA12030@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > As for calling set_main_name, I don't know if this is right or not. I > guess it depends what the DWARF folks meant by "not intended as a way > of finding the entry address for the program". Can a Fortran binary > have more than one "main program"? > > If they only meant "it does not indicate the address you can jump to in > order to start", then this seems quite reasonable. This makes sense to me. The "entry address" sounds like _start, not main. It does seem a bit odd to put this under the calling convention attribute, though, as the main function might be callable using the normal calling convention in some languages. Java, for instance. Jason