This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the elfutils project.
Re: [PATCH] libdw: Correct spelling of DW_LANG_PLI in dwarf.h.
- From: Josh Stone <jistone at redhat dot com>
- To: elfutils-devel at lists dot fedorahosted dot org
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 11:25:15 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] libdw: Correct spelling of DW_LANG_PLI in dwarf.h.
On 10/26/2016 11:18 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 10/26/2016 10:47 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 09:36:31AM -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
>>> On 10/26/2016 03:24 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>>> The name used in the standard and other DWARF implementations for
>>>> Programming Language One, PL/I, is DW_LANG_PLI (not DW_LANG_PL1).
>>>> +Version 0.168
>>>> +libdw: dwarf.h corrected the DW_LANG_PLI constant name (was DW_LANG_PL1).
>>>> + Any existing sources using the old name will have to be updated.
>>> That typo has been there since the dawn of elfutils.git, 2005-07-26
>>> commit b08d5a8fb42f. It seems callous to break API here, even if it was
>>> wrong. Why not include a #define to preserve compatibility?
>> Since it doesn't break ABI we have historically just fixed such wrong
>> constant names, see e.g. the removal in 0.160 of the non-existing
>> DW_TAG_mutable_type in 0.160. Given that others (libdwarf, binutils)
>> do define the correct name in their headers.
> It doesn't matter what other headers do -- if someone was already using
> the bad constant in elfutils' headers, that's an API break. But sure,
> you might still decide that's acceptable.
>> Also I would be somewhat afraid that might break the generation
>> of known-dwarf.h (although I didn't try).
> It might be ok for known-dwarf.h to know both PL1 and PLI.
>> Is there actually any source out there that uses this (wrong)
>> constant name?
> Lots of hits, but in the first few pages they're all just clones of
> via Google I found at least one real hit from an elfutils user:
libabigail picked up PL1 too:
> and it seems some version of eclipse cdt had the same typo:
> and also found the typo in a dwarfstd issue:
>>>> - DW_LANG_PL1 = 0x000f, /* ISO PL/1:1976 */
>>>> + DW_LANG_PLI = 0x000f, /* ISO PL/1:1976 */
>>> You should correct the comment too, "PL/I".
>> The '1' in the comment really is correct, because that
>> is the actual name of the standard. That is probably where
>> the confusion came from.
> Figure 8 in the DWARF 3 and 4 standards both call it "ANSI PL/I:1976"
> (not "ISO"), as does Table 3.1 in the DWARF 5 draft I've got.
> Wikipedia also uses "PL/I", and even has a redirect from "PL/1".
> This "I" is pronounced "one" though, surely as a roman numeral.
> elfutils-devel mailing list -- email@example.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org