This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFA: Support ARM BKPT instruction without an argument.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 01:15:23PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
>> Why does this want to return early from do_t_bkpt()?
>
> [...] Plus with my way, the needless testing and
> insertion of the number returned in exp.X_add_number is avoided.
Well, as a mere peon I don't much want to kick up a fuss and I'm sure
in these wee functions it won't much matter, but you did ask for "any
objections" :-)
At present the only early returns from these functions are for error
handling. Avoiding the "needless" usual bkpt processing is IMHO a bug
waiting to happen. What happens next year when something extra is
needed that's not trivial for BKPT 0, and someone adds some new code
lower down in the function? Either they don't notice this early return
for valid input, leading to a bug, or they have to change it to something
like what I'm suggesting anyway.
Perhaps I drank too much of that functional kool-aid...
John "nevermind -- I'm the peon, you're the maintainer :-)"