> If the DW_FORM_ values are meant to be in a vendor range of forms > (which DWARF4 unfortunately doesn't have), aren't they too low, i.e. isn't > there risk that eventually they'll clash with standard forms? > The forms numbers aren't limited to 0 .. 0x7f, at the expense of a slightly > bigger abbrev table you could as well use something very high, like 0x380+. > And, if you want to standardize it, I'd assume the codes would be lower > on the other side (there are still even free codes from 0x1a through to > 0x1f).
FORM codes aren't added very often because they do break compatibility, so I wouldn't expect values in the 0x70-7f range to collide with any future standard FORM codes. I did want to keep them in the single-byte LEB128 range, although as you point out, it wouldn't cost all that much to make them even larger. We can move them to a higher range if you prefer. I do intend to standardize these once we start working on DWARF-5, but I felt it was a good idea to try them out experimentally before reserving any standard values. -cary
