This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] dwarf.c handle new DWARFv5 C11, C++11 and C++14 DW_LANG constants.
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- To: Sebastian Huber <sebastian dot huber at embedded-brains dot de>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 22:04:56 +1030
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] dwarf.c handle new DWARFv5 C11, C++11 and C++14 DW_LANG constants.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1416860956-29285-1-git-send-email-mjw at redhat dot com> <1417019098 dot 4954 dot 29 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <54773EBE dot 1010106 at embedded-brains dot de> <1417101289 dot 4954 dot 46 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <5478568A dot 8070903 at embedded-brains dot de> <1417173558 dot 4954 dot 50 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <5478648F dot 7020604 at embedded-brains dot de> <1417450577 dot 4954 dot 75 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <54800BB0 dot 8080204 at embedded-brains dot de>
On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 08:22:24AM +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
> On 01/12/14 17:16, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 13:03 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >>>On 28/11/14 12:19, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >>>> >On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:03 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >>>>> >>On 27/11/14 16:14, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >>>>>> >>>On Thu, 2014-11-27 at 16:09 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >>>>>>>> >>>>>Out of curiosity why is this "ANSI C11" and not simply "C11" (like
> >>>>>>>> >>>>>"C++11") or "ISO C11"?
> >>>>>> >>>No particular reason, except to be consistent with the existing naming
> >>>>>> >>>used. DW_LANG_C89 was already "ANSI C" and DW_LANG_C_plus_plus was
> >>>>>> >>>already "C++".
> >>>>> >>As far as I know there is no ANSI C11, the standard is ISO/IEC 9899:2011.
> >>>> >What is you recommendation then? Currently we have DW_LANG_C89/"ANSI C",
> >>>> >DW_LANG_C/"non-ANSI C", DW_LANG_C99/"ANSI C99" and DW_LANG_C11/"ANSI
> >>>> >C11".
> >>>
> >>>I would simply use "C11".
> >OK. Patch attached.
>
> Thanks for the patch. Are there any objections to apply it?
Please commit.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM