[PATCH] D30785: [DWARF] Versioning for DWARF constants; verify FORMs

[David Blaikie via llvm-commits]

*nod* Agreed - I think that's worth considering (& then there's no issue
with needing to put the vendor in the same namespace/enum/grouping as the
version, too)

Though probably vendor extensions won't be versioned the same way the
standard is anyway (eg: they might be added part-way through a standard, so
some versions of the vendors tools that can handle DWARF4 can handle this
vendor extension, and some can't).. so I'm not sure if that's all to
helpful. Maybe it is...

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 4:28 PM Greg Clayton via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> clayborg added a comment.
>
> I wonder since we are adding new macro parameters to some macros if we
> shouldn't add two params: version and vendor for anything that uses the
> special versions. Currently you are overloading version with vendor into a
> single integer, why not add both version and vendor? Then vendor could be
>
>   DWARF_VENDOR_DWARF = 0, // DWARF as ratified by the latest DWARF standard
>   DWARF_VENDOR_APPLE = 1,
>   DWARF_VENDOR_BORDLAND = 2,
>   ...
>
> This would still allow vendors to specify a version value for their user
> enums.
>
> Other than that it looks nice. It will really help with "llvm-dwarfdump
> --verify" in the future.
>
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D30785
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20170311/0a790de3/attachment.html>