[PATCH] Fix range lists issues (dwarf-5)

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Kumar,

> 1. in the cases where we fetch values from fetch_indexed_addr(), should we use "addr_index" or "index" itself is fine? because we are fetching it from .debug_addr and emitting. I meant for DW_FORM_loclistx and DW_FORM_rnglistx using index is fine, for else part should we use addr_index or index?
> 
> Before fix:     <24>   DW_AT_low_pc      : (addr_index: 0x0): 201e40
> After fix:     <24>   DW_AT_low_pc      : (index: 0x0): 201e40

This is debatable.  All of the forms are indices (indexes ?) of some kind
so using the generic term "index" seems appropriate to me.  If we instead
use "addr_index" for address indices then shouldn't we use "loclist_index"
and "rnglist_index" for the others ?

Also in the current 2.38 binutils release (and earlier releases) we use
"addr_index" by default, but in wide mode we use just "index", which made
no sense to me.

So unless you have a strong objection I would like to leave the code in
its current state.


> 2. in the new function(display_debug_rnglists) added, newline character printing is missing

Thanks - added.

Cheers
   Nick