Re: [PATCH] Naming dwarves

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>]

Mark Kettenis writes:
 > Andrew already made a side-remark in an earlier message: how are we
 > going to name our files and functions related to DWARF?
 > 
 > There are basically two generations of the DWARF Debugging Information
 > Format.  The first generation is usually referred to as DWARF Version
 > 1.  There is a 1.1.0 revision of the DWARF standard, but this revision
 > is supposed to be fully binary compatible with the origional DWARF
 > definition.  The second generation is referred to as DWARF Version 2,
 > or simply DWARF-2.  Although the basic structure of Version 2 format
 > is the very similar to Version 1, the encoding is different.
 > Therefore these two formats are not binary compatible, which is why we
 > have seperate DWARF and DWARF-2 symbol readers in GDB.  There are also
 > many new features in DWARF-2.
 > 
 > There is also a public draft for DWARF Version 3, which should be
 > largely binary compatible with Version 2.  Standardization of Version
 > 3 seems to have stopped, but some of the proposed extensions are
 > already in use.  I believe our DWARF-2 reader supports these.  Since
 > the Version 3 format is largely binary compatible with Version 2, I
 > don't think we'll ever have a seperate DWARF-3 reader in GDB.  The
 > number of new features in the proposed standard is rather limited.
 > 
 > Currently we have the following files dealing with DWARF:
 > 
 > DWARF Version 1:
 >   dwarfread.c
 > 
 > DWARF Version 2:
 >   dwarf2read.c
 >   dwarf2expr.c dwarf2expr.h
 >   dwarf2loc.c dwarf2loc.h
 >   dwarf2cfi.c dwarf2cfi.h (consider these deprecated)
 >   dwarf-frame.c dwarf-frame.h (on the i386newframe branch)
 > 
 > The dwarfread.c module exports only one function:
 > dwarf_build_psymtabs().  The dwarf2*.c modules export several
 > functions, some with the dwarf2_ prefix, some with the dwarf_ prefix,
 > and some with no prefix at all.  I think Andrew would like to see that
 > we use dwarf2 in the names of files implementing DWARF-2 things, and
 > the dwarf2_ prefix for public function names.  Is that right?  If
 > people agree, I'll rename my DWARF CFI bits before I move things over
 > to mainline.

yes please, that would be super.

thanks
elena


 > 
 > Mark