Summary: | chained .req do not work | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | binutils | Reporter: | Axel Heider <axelheider> |
Component: | gas | Assignee: | unassigned |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | bug-binutils |
Priority: | P2 | ||
Version: | 2.15 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Host: | i386/cygwin | Target: | ARM |
Build: | Last reconfirmed: |
Description
Axel Heider
2007-06-15 14:30:36 UTC
I think it shouldn't be allowed. Consider: rsXX1 .req r0 rsXX2 .req rsXX1 .unreq rsXX1 What value does rsXX2 have now? What if rsXX1 were further redefined? Well, in this case I would actually expect something like an error at ".unreq rsXX1" with the message ".unreq not allowed, because another .req definition at line XXX already depends on it". A un-definition of "rsXX1" should not be allowerd when other things depend on it, too. |