This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] PR debug/38757 gcc does not emit DW_LANG_C99
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:19:57 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR debug/38757 gcc does not emit DW_LANG_C99
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1413189233 dot 5534 dot 23 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <1415803819 dot 4965 dot 13 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <20141112145413 dot GG5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc0cHUZ95cF+=XGF-OLp9qdJ4-JO46EEP1O5d8uCH-cuqw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141112153352 dot GI5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <1415807199 dot 4965 dot 16 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <20141112163149 dot GJ5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc17teyVvmxMy+taGk1KXHrTAtp=RRjHax70s1KgLm8nNA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141113111702 dot GK5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc2zUjEzjb1xeOZHBbf20zyoD76g5tX+ksEnEWMCcx=CzA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141113130715 dot GN5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 01:08:44PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:08:01PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> Btw, I have nothing against changing TRANSLATION_UNIT_LANGUAGE
>> >> to DW_LANG_* directly - we only use it for choosing the language
>> >> of the dwarf unit. This would of course mean to change its initialization
>> >> from
>> >>
>> >> TRANSLATION_UNIT_LANGUAGE (tu) = lang_hooks.name;
>> >>
>> >> to sth like
>> >>
>> >> TRANSLATION_UNIT_LANGUAGE (tu) = lang_hooks.dw_lang;
>> >>
>> >> which means adding a langhook (thus more similar to your original
>> >> patch).
>> >
>> > But that would mean having to include dwarf2 headers in every FE.
>>
>> Don't see what would be bad about this, but well...
>
> I think strings are better than DWARF constants for middle-end thing,
> say if DWARF doesn't make a difference between some language variants but
> something different in the middle-end wants, or updating all the backends to
> test when C++17 is released and DWARF assigns a language code for it
> would be also weird.
>
> If you want an integer instead of strings, it better should be some enum
> with major and minor parts in it, so that one can easily test if it is
> a C++ family, C family, C/C++ family, Fortran family etc. Still, that would
> make things hard for third party frontends, which wouldn't know what values
> to use if they don't have a language code in DWARF.
I'm fine with the string solution as well. Just properly transfer whatever
info you want through the translation unit decl and LTO stream it.
Richard.
> Jakub