David, You are talking about the Version 5 codes actually, more precisely those added during Version 6 development. (Version 6 uses DW_LNAME, not DW_LANG prefixes.) Yes, I see 0x0029 is unused. I see no reason not to fill in that hole.
Since Cary is the keeper of that list for V5 (and V6) I suppose it is his call. Ron On Sat, Oct 25, 2025 at 5:29 PM David Anderson via Dwarf-discuss < [email protected]> wrote: > The DW_LANG DWARF6 table lists no language for 0x0029. > > The listed DW_NAME around 0x0029 are > #define DW_LANG_Crystal 0x0028 /* DWARF6 */ > > #define DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_17 0x002a /* DWARF6 */ > > The original proposal on 0x0029 was for DW_LANG_Nasm March 2021, > but on email discussion it was agreed the name DW_LANG_Assembly > was more appropriate and DW_LANG_Assembly was added as 0x0031. > > Issues 210115.1 requested Nasm. > 210208.1 requested DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_17 and was assigned 0x002a. > > I was just idly wondering if, for the next requested LANG id, > we could assign 0x0029 ... > > David Anderson > > > -- > Dwarf-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss >
-- Dwarf-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
