Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Cary Coutant via Dwarf-discuss]

>
> Actually, it would help my process if you would announce at each meeting
> what language names and their corresponding issue numbers were processed in
> the prior period. The point is to get that information into the Minutes. No
> discussion needed, just an announcement. Actually if that information is
> presented in the Agenda for a meeting that would probably suffice, although
> it is the minutes that should be complete and definitive.
>

Good idea. I'll do that.

-cary
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Cary Coutant via Dwarf-discuss]

>
>
> >DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the
> list was out of order, so when I assigned >DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked
> like 0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to
> reassign >DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.
>
> I think it would be safer to just leave well-enough alone. I just updated
> the document to match the website (and make DW_LNAME_HIP = 0x0029). So any
> change causes work for me. Similarly it creates work for anyone who is
> actually trying to use code DW_LNAME_Assembly. Why bother?
>

Looks like DW_LNAME_HIP never made it into the document after it was
approved. Given the timing, it would make a little more sense to renumber
Assembly instead, but since that's already in the document, and HIP isn't,
I'll renumber HIP. Since this affects the DWARF 6 language codes only, we
shouldn't have to worry about affecting anyone. Heads up, though: if anyone
has started using DW_LNAME_HIP, please be aware of this change!

I've added this as Issue 240423.1
.

-cary
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Ron Brender via Dwarf-discuss]

Cary,

>DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the list
was out of order, so when I assigned >DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked like
0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to reassign
>DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.

I think it would be safer to just leave well-enough alone. I just updated
the document to match the website (and make DW_LNAME_HIP = 0x0029). So any
change causes work for me. Similarly it creates work for anyone who is
actually trying to use code DW_LNAME_Assembly. Why bother?

Ron




On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 12:25 PM Cary Coutant  wrote:

> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got
>> incorporated into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication).
>> Perhaps because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved.
>> That status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
>>
>> Anyway, I'll fix it for V6.
>>
>> The next available code is 0x0027. What makes you think the code should
>> be 0x0029?
>>
>>
>> I was looking at https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html where the last
>> assigned langiage is DW_LNAME_Hylo 0x0028.
>>
>
> DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the list
> was out of order, so when I assigned DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked like
> 0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to reassign
> DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.
>
> -cary
>
>
>
>
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Ron Brender via Dwarf-discuss]

Cary,

Actually, it would help my process if you would announce at each meeting
what language names and their corresponding issue numbers were processed in
the prior period. The point is to get that information into the Minutes. No
discussion needed, just an announcement. Actually if that information is
presented in the Agenda for a meeting that would probably suffice, although
it is the minutes that should be complete and definitive.

Thanks,
Ron


On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 12:30 PM Cary Coutant  wrote:

>
>> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got
>> incorporated into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication).
>> Perhaps because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved.
>> That status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
>>
>
> I've been following Michael's protocol of using the status "Language Code
> Assigned" for new language codes, where no committee discussion is
> necessary. Would it help your process if I added the word "Accepted" to the
> issue status?
>
> -cary
>
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Cary Coutant via Dwarf-discuss]

>
>
> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got
> incorporated into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication).
> Perhaps because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved.
> That status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
>

I've been following Michael's protocol of using the status "Language Code
Assigned" for new language codes, where no committee discussion is
necessary. Would it help your process if I added the word "Accepted" to the
issue status?

-cary
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Cary Coutant via Dwarf-discuss]

>
> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got
> incorporated into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication).
> Perhaps because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved.
> That status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
>
> Anyway, I'll fix it for V6.
>
> The next available code is 0x0027. What makes you think the code should be
> 0x0029?
>
>
> I was looking at https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html where the last
> assigned langiage is DW_LNAME_Hylo 0x0028.
>

DW_LANG_HIP/DW_LNAME_HIP was assigned first, but for some reason, the list
was out of order, so when I assigned DW_LNAME_Assembly, it looked like
0x001c was the last code assigned. I think it would be safer to reassign
DW_LNAME_Assembly as 0x0029.

-cary
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Adrian Prantl via Dwarf-discuss]

> On Apr 24, 2024, at 5:46 AM, Ron Brender  wrote:
> 
> It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got incorporated 
> into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication). Perhaps because 
> the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved. That status really 
> only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.
> 
> Anyway, I'll fix it for V6.
> 
> The next available code is 0x0027. What makes you think the code should be 
> 0x0029?

I was looking at https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html where the last assigned 
langiage is DW_LNAME_Hylo 0x0028.

-- adrian

> 
> Ron
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 8:06 PM Adrian Prantl via Dwarf-discuss 
> mailto:dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org>> 
> wrote:
>> # Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d
>> 
>> ## Overview
>> 
>> The list of DWARF Version 6 Language and Version Codes double-assigns the 
>> DW_AT_LNAME code 0x001d to "HIP" and "Assembly".
>> 
>> ## Proposed Changes
>> 
>> Reassign HIP to 0x0029.
>> 
>> ## References
>> 
>> https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html
>> 
>> -- 
>> Dwarf-discuss mailing list
>> Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org 
>> https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss

Re: [Dwarf-discuss] Proposal: Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d

[Ron Brender via Dwarf-discuss]

It appears that DW_LNAME_HIP, proposed in 230120.4,  never got incorporated
into the DWARF working document (so there is no duplication). Perhaps
because the Issue status is "Code Assigned" rather than Approved. That
status really only applies to the V5 code assignment actually.

Anyway, I'll fix it for V6.

The next available code is 0x0027. What makes you think the code should be
0x0029?

Ron


On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 8:06 PM Adrian Prantl via Dwarf-discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:

> # Error: Duplicate DW_AT_LNAME 1d
>
> ## Overview
>
> The list of DWARF Version 6 Language and Version Codes double-assigns the
> DW_AT_LNAME code 0x001d to "HIP" and "Assembly".
>
> ## Proposed Changes
>
> Reassign HIP to 0x0029.
>
> ## References
>
> https://dwarfstd.org/languages-v6.html
>
> --
> Dwarf-discuss mailing list
> Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
> https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss
>
-- 
Dwarf-discuss mailing list
Dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
https://lists.dwarfstd.org/mailman/listinfo/dwarf-discuss