This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: gas/expr.c: 0b vs 0b0 vs 00b
- From: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 18:05:50 -0400
- Subject: Re: gas/expr.c: 0b vs 0b0 vs 00b
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <201508070539 dot t775dYYM024692 at greed dot delorie dot com> <20150811152430 dot GB23078 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org>
> Actually 1b is a backward reference too. I think both 0b and 1b
> without following binary digits ought to be treated as backward refs
> on these targets, since if you want to write a binary 0 or 1 with an
> explicit suffix that can be done as 0B or 1B.
Note that the gas docs are vague about this: one spot says local refs
are '1' through '9', another refers to the "first ten single-digit..."
But yeah, I was only trying to special-case the 0b+ case.
> Here's a patch that extends yours a little. What do you think?
Seems OK to me.