On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 8:45 AM Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 06:38:16PM -0800, David Blaikie via Gcc wrote: > > > I would pick -gdwarf32/-gdwarf64 (are we sure the DWARF spec will > > > never reach version 32 or 64? > > > maybe -g32 / -g64 similar to -m32/-m64 are good enough?) > > > > Any sense of a good way to break the tie/uncertainty? > > > > Alternatively: If Clang picks something here (likely from within this > > range of candidates - though given I've got a fair bit of say on the > > Clang side, and if left to me, I'd probably lean heavily on the > > -fdwarf32/64 side), is it likely that choice will tend to be adopted > > by GCC? I'd rather not get out of sync, but I expect a bit hard to get > > a conclusion on the GCC side without patches in progress, etc. Got a > > sense of who are the people who would likely be deciders/patch > > approvers for such a naming choice on the GCC side? > > Depends on what it would choose. > I agree with Richard and I'd lean towards -gdwarf32/-gdwarf64, even when > DWARF 32 is released in 81 years from now or how many, it would use > -gdwarf-32.
Works for me. Let's go with -gdwarf32/64. Richard. > Jakub >
