This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Question about elf64-mips.c
- To: mark@codesourcery.com
- Subject: Re: Question about elf64-mips.c
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
- Date: 6 Jun 1999 21:43:35 -0400
- CC: binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
- References: <19990605173330J.mitchell@codesourcery.com>
From: mark@codesourcery.com
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 17:33:30 -0700
This file uses routines in elf32-mips.c. That would seem to imply
that you cannot configure bfd for just elf64-bigmips, say; you must
also use elf32-bigmips, or some such.
Correct.
Wouldn't it be better to move
the common code to a header file and #include it both places? Or,
move it to a separate .c and use it from both elf32-mips.c and
elf64-mips.c?
The latter would certainly be better than the former. I personally
consider the extensive use of code in header files in BFD to be a bad
idea.
However, the cost of requiring 32 bit MIPS ELF support when
configuring for 64 bit MIPS ELF is not high.
I'm also working on the N32/64-bit ABI support, and there will be a
lot of common code there, too.
I don't think it's that important to make BFD be as minimal as
possible. It's only important to make it small within reason.
If you feel like creating a common .c file, go ahead. It would be
better, if only slightly better. But don't feel obligated to do this
work.
Ian