Re: [PATCH] Naming dwarves

Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-18T04:35:23Z

On Sat, May 17, 2003 at 02:53:29PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Andrew already made a side-remark in an earlier message: how are we
> going to name our files and functions related to DWARF?
>
> There are basically two generations of the DWARF Debugging Information
> Format. The first generation is usually referred to as DWARF Version
> 1. There is a 1.1.0 revision of the DWARF standard, but this revision
> is supposed to be fully binary compatible with the origional DWARF
> definition. The second generation is referred to as DWARF Version 2,
> or simply DWARF-2. Although the basic structure of Version 2 format
> is the very similar to Version 1, the encoding is different.
> Therefore these two formats are not binary compatible, which is why we
> have seperate DWARF and DWARF-2 symbol readers in GDB. There are also
> many new features in DWARF-2.
>
> There is also a public draft for DWARF Version 3, which should be
> largely binary compatible with Version 2. Standardization of Version
> 3 seems to have stopped, but some of the proposed extensions are
> already in use. I believe our DWARF-2 reader supports these. Since
> the Version 3 format is largely binary compatible with Version 2, I
> don't think we'll ever have a seperate DWARF-3 reader in GDB. The
> number of new features in the proposed standard is rather limited.
>
> Currently we have the following files dealing with DWARF:
>
> DWARF Version 1:
> dwarfread.c
>
> DWARF Version 2:
> dwarf2read.c
> dwarf2expr.c dwarf2expr.h
> dwarf2loc.c dwarf2loc.h
> dwarf2cfi.c dwarf2cfi.h (consider these deprecated)
> dwarf-frame.c dwarf-frame.h (on the i386newframe branch)
>
> The dwarfread.c module exports only one function:
> dwarf_build_psymtabs(). The dwarf2*.c modules export several
> functions, some with the dwarf2_ prefix, some with the dwarf_ prefix,
> and some with no prefix at all. I think Andrew would like to see that
> we use dwarf2 in the names of files implementing DWARF-2 things, and
> the dwarf2_ prefix for public function names. Is that right? If
> people agree, I'll rename my DWARF CFI bits before I move things over
> to mainline.

I'd certainly prefer it to be a dwarf2frame or dwarf2-frame rather than
dwarf.

I'm thinking about running through dwarf2read.c and renaming dwarf_*
there...

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer