From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26406 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2009 00:02:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 26256 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2009 00:02:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:02:25 +0000 Received: from wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n6H02Kju016998; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:02:21 -0700 Received: from bwz5 (bwz5.prod.google.com [10.188.26.5]) by wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n6H02HMB019996; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:02:18 -0700 Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so406075bwz.16 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:02:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.1.17 with SMTP id d17mr191657mui.60.1247788937214; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:02:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20090716205428.8CCBB846E6__41074.7728696608$1247777706$gmane$org@localhost> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA] Add dwarf4 values to include/dwarf2.h From: Doug Evans To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, ccoutant@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00418.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Doug" =3D=3D Doug Evans writes: > > Doug> + =A0 =A0DW_AT_GNU_odr_signature =3D 0x210f, > > I would like to ask that all new GNU extensions be documented in > dwarf2.h. =A0The existing extensions are already the subject of some > bafflement; I would like to end this practice. > > I think my ideal form for this would be a long comment in the style of > the rest of the DWARF standard -- something that someone already > familiar with DWARF could readily read and understand. Maybe this patch should be split into two then.