Re: [PATCH] DWARF add DW_AT_noreturn on noreturn function subprogram.

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 12/01/14 14:44, Cary Coutant wrote:
> > Presumably we don't have any sense when the values will be assigned, right?
> > Any chance we could speed that along a bit?
>
> As Jason said, the value in the current draft is unlikely to change,
> and I think he and I can probably lobby to keep it unchanged if there
> any danger that the numbering will change. The committee doesn't
> really like it when we jump the gun and use values before the final
> spec is published, but as a practical matter, it's often necessary and
> (at this stage) pretty safe.
Rather than having to lobby to keep it unchanged because we jumped the 
gun, can we lobby to get the number assigned in the near future rather 
than in the potentially far future?  That feels more cooperative to me :-)

Would that make Michael happier?

jeff