This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Proposal for merging scalar-storage-order branch into mainline


On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 12:17:49PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> > How is this represented in DWARF?
>>
>> This is not represented on the branch, because this cannot be done in pure
>> DWARF.  DW_AT_endianity only applies to base types or stand-alone objects and
>> we would need it for DW_TAG_member (and even DW_TAG_array_type in Ada).  But
>> this could easily be implemented once the representation is agreed on.
>
> DW_AT_endianity attribute is listed in DWARF4 for:
> DW_TAG_base_type
> DW_TAG_constant
> DW_TAG_formal_parameter
> DW_TAG_variable
> Not really sure how to interpret it e.g. on DW_TAG_variable (or
> formal_parameter) if it has DW_TAG_reference_type type - does it talk
> about the endianity of what it refers to, or the reference itself, both?
> Anyway, the DWARF standard doesn't forbid using it on other kinds of DIEs
> and I think emitting it on DW_TAG_member would be natural.
> Not sure why you would want it on DW_TAG_array_type, the endianity for
> arrays should be specified on the element type, shouldn't it?
> Or is array indexing endian dependent?

Maybe endian is index dependent (heh, you never know with Ada!)

Richard.

>         Jakub


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]