I think it's fine to remove it and just leave a comment about the value
being reserved.
On 06/18/2014 11:38 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> And a future version of DWARF might
> use the number for a completely different purpose.
The issue you linked says this:
Remove DW_TAG_mutable_type from Appendix A (Figure 17)
(Make sure not to reassign the number 0x3e to another tag.
Perha
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 08:48 -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> It's fine to patch its use out, in elfutils and others, but why take the
> API hit of removing the constant? The number is still allocated, so it
> won't do any harm to leave it there.
It is not an ABI break. But technically it is indeed not
On 06/18/2014 02:48 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> The DW_TAG_mutable_type was only mentioned in an early draft of DWARFv3.
> But was removed because there are no C++ mutable qualified types. It was
> replaced by a new attribute DW_AT_mutable on DW_TAG_member DIEs. The new
> attribute is available in d
The DW_TAG_mutable_type was only mentioned in an early draft of DWARFv3.
But was removed because there are no C++ mutable qualified types. It was
replaced by a new attribute DW_AT_mutable on DW_TAG_member DIEs. The new
attribute is available in dwarf.h.
http://dwarfstd.org/ShowIssue.php?issue=05022
