On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 09:58:01AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > + if ((dwarf_version >= 4 || !dwarf_strict)
>>
>> Why >=4? Isn't this a DWARF 5 feature?
>
> It is actually DWARF
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 09:58:01AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > + if ((dwarf_version >= 4 || !dwarf_strict)
>
> Why >=4? Isn't this a DWARF 5 feature?
It is actually DWARF 4 already.
Looking at DWARF4 DW_AT_* additions, we also don't
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> + if ((dwarf_version >= 4 || !dwarf_strict)
Why >=4? Isn't this a DWARF 5 feature?
OK with that change.
Jason
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 07:31:16PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> This relies on the previous langhook patch (which greatly simplifies it).
>
> I'm only handling variables for now, DW_AT_const_expr is just weird on
> functions/methods, it is supposed to appear only on
> DW_TAG_inlined_subroutine?
>