Re: [patch] Add support for DW_LNE_set_discriminator

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Cary" == Cary Coutant <ccoutant@google.com> writes:

Cary> One question, though. I've written the patch to maintain the
Cary> philosophy that gdb will complain about any unknown extended opcodes,
Cary> and will give up on processing the remainder of the line number table.
Cary> I could change default case in dwarf_decode_lines() to just skip over
Cary> unknown extended opcodes, instead of adding the explicit case for the
Cary> one new opcode. Which would be preferable?

I think the current approach seems reasonable.  If someone adds a
semantics-changing opcode, it seems preferable to fail than to get the
wrong answer.  But, I'm not very well versed in the ins and outs of
dwarf interpretation...

Right now the complaint does not mention the unrecognized opcode or
anything like that.  It seems like that would be a nice addition.

Cary> * dwarf2read.c (dwarf_decode_lines): Recognize and ignore
Cary> DW_LNE_set_discriminator.

Ok.  For future reference, a link to the standard proposal would have
helped :)

Tom