On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 09:52:28AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On 10/14/2016 01:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >This also uses the infrastructure of the langhook patch I've sent earlier. >> >It emits (if not strict dwarf) DW_AT_inline on explicit or implicit inline >> >variables, and also tweaks dwarf2out so that for inline static data members >> >we consider in-class declarations as definitions (emit DW_AT_linkage_name >> >and no DW_AT_declaration) for them. >> >> Hmm, so there's no DW_TAG_variable for the inline static data member? That >> seems problematic to me. The DWARF 3 convention that static data members >> use DW_TAG_member seems rather misguided, since in fact they are variables. >> Why did that change? > > I had to bisect it, apparently it has been changed by myself in > r145770, rationale in thread starting at > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-04/msg00039.html > > The current DWARF 5 wording is: > "If the variable entry represents the defining declaration for a C++ static > data > member of a structure, class or union, the entry has a DW_AT_specification > attribute, whose value is a reference to the debugging information entry > representing the declaration of this data member. The referenced entry has > the tag DW_TAG_member and will be a child of some class, structure or > union type entry." on page 98 in DWARF5_Public_Review.pdf.
Yes, this changed in DWARF 3; DWARF 2 didn't specify the tag. I think this was a mistake. > Incidentally, I've filed today a DWARF issue that Appendix A doesn't list > for DW_TAG_member lots of attributes that are allowed for DW_TAG_variable > and are useful for static data members. Using DW_TAG_variable would address that, too. Jason
