This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: Add STB_GNU_SECONDARY
- From: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at spamcop dot net>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "Ansari, Zia" <zia dot ansari at intel dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:55:52 -0400
- Subject: Re: RFC: Add STB_GNU_SECONDARY
- References: <CAMe9rOqGmiGyp42inUb9O8cH3Ga+PNSjHLAQcEfeTXs1RcM0qg@mail.gmail.com>
Quoting "H.J. Lu" <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
We have a need to define a secondary symbol as backup in
case there isn't a primary one. Here is a proposal for
STB_GNU_SECONDARY. Any comments?
If two levels of prevedence (ordinary and weak) are not enough, why will
three levels be so much better?
If you use a signed fractional or even floating-point precedence value,
you have a lot more space to accomodate afterthoughts - above, below,
and in-between in precedence to existing values.
Even better, you could use symbolic tags, and have the linker script
assign precedence values to these tags.