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: obj_coff vs section_hash

From: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
To: amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:06:02 -0500
Subject: Re: obj_coff vs section_hash
References: <200201220020.g0M0Knn21310@greed.delorie.com> <20020122005914.GJ16187@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>


> I think fixing the callers of subseg_get is best, at least until
> you're sure that nothing compares string pointers.  ;)

It's a generated name.  There's no way to dynamically get the same
pointer that way (without using a hash table, which defeats the
purpose ;) so we'll never support string pointer comparison.  However,
changing "copy" to true will instantly break anyone who tries that.

I'll check in the obj-coff patch anyway.

References:
- obj_coff vs section_hash
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: obj_coff vs section_hash
  - From: Alan Modra

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