This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFA: Support ARM BKPT instruction without an argument.
Hi John,
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:35:33AM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > Any objections to the following patch ?
>
> Besides "sheesh, why's it so hard to type a zero?"? :-)
Indeed :-)
> > if (my_get_expression (& expr, & str) || (expr.X_op != O_constant))
> > {
> > + if (expr.X_op == O_absent)
> > + /* As a convenience we allow 'bkpt' without an operand. */
> > + end_of_line (str);
> > + else
> > inst.error = _("bad or missing expression");
> > return;
> > }
>
> Why does this want to return early from do_t_bkpt()? Allegedly
> expression() puts X_add_number=0 for O_absent, so wouldn't the rest of
> the function do the right thing if you just change the if condition to
> "my_get_expression(...) || !(expr.X_op==O_constant || expr.X_op==O_absent)"
> instead? Seems cleaner...
Well personally I find that kind of boolean expression harder to read
than the original one, which is why I went for a separate test inside
the 'if' statement. Plus with my way, the needless testing and
insertion of the number returned in exp.X_add_number is avoided.
> And the error message should perhaps change to just "bad expression".
Good point. I will fix that.
Cheers
Nick