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: demand_empty_rest_of_line and ignore_rest_of_line


On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> what is the intended difference between demand_empty_rest_of_line and
> ignore_rest_of_line?

>From memory and trigged by the names (i.e. not cheating and
looking at the code ;-) one is supposed to issue an error
(demand_*) and the other (ignore_*) should just skip to the next
line (and update whatever counters and such).  If they don't,
I'd argue it's confusing enough that a change is warranted.

> which implies to me that ignore_ROL should be silent.

It's not?

> Also, what do people think about demand_empty_ROL issuing an error?

It doesn't?

:-)

> IMHO, if the syntax requires no more stuff, it's an error if there is
> more stuff.
>
> Would a patch which made ignore_ROL silent and demand_empty_ROL issue
> an error be acceptable?

It's used by config/tc-* so I suggest regression checking enough
targets to cover all target uses of demand_* and ignore_*.

brgds, H-P


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