shchenz added a comment. In D104291#2821581 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D104291#2821581>, @stuart wrote:
>> There is no `CPlusPlus03` in `LangOptions`, so it is better not to merge >> `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03` support with D99250 >> <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99250>. > > Oh - I see, `c++03` is defined in LangStandards.def an alias for `c++98`, as > the former essentially consists of bugfixes for the latter. This loosely > suggests to me that C++03 implementations are (likely to be / mostly?) > conformant to C++98, but that C++98 implementations may not be fully > conformant to C++03. Given this alias, it doesn't seem at all clear to me > which of DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_98 and DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03 would be the > better choice, if both C++98 and C++03 must share a language tag... but I > presume this has been discussed before. (It also doesn't seem clear whether > it would be better to model "c++98" as an alias for "c++03".) > >> Yes, we don't have `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_17` and `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_20` in >> clang for now. I guess this is because clang does not support DWARF 6. DWARF >> 6 is not officially released? Once DWARF 6 is released and clang starts to >> support DWARF 6, I think we should add the support for >> `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_17` and `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_20` in the place that this >> patch changes. > > New DWARF language codes <http://dwarfstd.org/Languages.php> are published > ahead of the release of the next version of DWARF, so that they may be used > by implementations without having to wait for new DWARF version. > > It would therefore make sense to go ahead and add `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_17` > and `DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_20` now, without waiting, but only in the non-strict > DWARF mode. (There would be the question of whether it would still make sense > in the code to say "DwarfVersion >= 6" given that DWARF 6 would be otherwise > unsupported... but I don't have a strong view on that question.) I think it would be strange to check `DwarfVersion >= 6` if we can not set dwarf version to 6 by anyways. Maybe we can first add the DWARF 6 support to the front end first. This is the patch where `-gdwarf-5` was introduced https://reviews.llvm.org/rG3cb592d6b60c. Seems it was also before DWARF 5 was official released. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D104291/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D104291 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
