Re: RFC: Support DW_TAG_entry_point

["H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
>
> Jan> I guess the whole patch tagets just one compiler's (ifort's?) use
> Jan> of DW_TAG_entry_point.  DWARF standard also says neither that
> Jan> DW_TAG_entry_point should be a child of DW_TAG_subprogram nor
> Jan> that it should not have its own DW_AT_high_pc.  Therefore
> Jan> assuming DW_TAG_entry_point will be the first child DIE is
> Jan> ensured for the target compiler this patch was made for.
>
> Ok, I went and looked through DWARF 3 again to try to understand more.
>
> I think this means that the compiler in question is emitting invalid
> DWARF, or at least using its own extension.  In that case I suppose I
> would be more inclined to allow this, provided that it doesn't impact
> the possibility of correctly implementing DW_TAG_entry_point in the
> future (maybe the patch already does this too, I really don't know).

I will take a look.

> Assuming this is an extension, I would like a comment to that effect,
> mentioning the compiler.  A test case wouldn't hurt, either.
>

I do have a testcase. But you need ifort to use it.


-- 
H.J.