Re: [cygport] enabling a replacement for "objdump -d -l"

[Jon Turney <jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk>]

On 11/03/2024 19:35, ASSI via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps writes:
[...]
> 
>> Fifty lines of perl with no comments! This is just line noise to me
>> unless I spend lots of time staring at it :)
> 
> That's what you get from an experiment that went rather more well than
> planned.
> 
>> Seriously, this should at least say "I'm running objdump -Wl to dump
>> out the .debug_line section containing DWARF XYZ information.
>>
>> Then maybe some comments about what assumptions it's making about the
>> human-readable output it's parsing.
> 
> So you're asking for a manpage, really.  Should be doable with enough
> round tuits.

Well, that would be nice too, but there is is difference between 
describing what it does and describing how it does what it does.

But I'm not being oblique here. I really do want comments.

I'm not sure what's so astounding about the suggestion that a fifty line 
script should have some comments in it that you can't believe I mean 
that literally...

[...]
>> What this line is doing is obvious, the rest of this block, not so much.
> 
> Nothing to see here, move along… :-P

...

[...]
>> Since the helper script will be installed, it could be made a boolean.
> 
> Out of habit grown over decades, I always keep an escape hatch for using
> local (modified) copies in such scripts.

Well, OK.  This is less useful to people who actually want to use it, 
though, requiring them to know that 
"DWARF_PARSE=/usr/share/cygport/tools/dwarf-parse.pl" is the right 
incantation.

Perhaps "DWARF_PARSE=1" could be a shorthand for that?