This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext

From: DJ Delorie <dj at delorie dot com>
To: ac131313 at cygnus dot com
Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 00:35:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext
References: <3C7864AB.1060900@cygnus.com> <200202240447.g1O4ldb05280@envy.delorie.com> <3C787B14.7080704@cygnus.com>


> The single format wasn't sufficient for a program trying to correctly 
> manipulate both big and little endian Arm floating points - hence the 
> two new formats.

Is it safe to say that the code you're removing never actually worked,
then?  If so, then there shouldn't be any legacy code relying on it,
right?

> GDB has a strong preference for flushing code it no longer needs.
> It has the unfortunate habbit of rearing its head at later
> inopportune moments.

Perhaps, but libiberty is used by more than just gdb, so I have to be
extra careful about backwards compatibility.  Just yesterday someone
was asking about using libiberty in their own program.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext
  - From: Andrew Cagney

References:
- [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: [patch/rfc] Delete floatformat_arm_ext
  - From: Andrew Cagney

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]