Re: [patch] ld/pe-dll.c: ordinals and noname

[DJ Delorie <dj at delorie dot com>]

> :   	  if (!pe_def_file->exports[s].flag_noname)
> :   	    {
> :   	      char *ename = pe_def_file->exports[s].name;
> :   	      bfd_put_32 (abfd, ERVA (enamestr), (void *) enameptrs);
> :   	      strcpy (enamestr, ename);
> :   	      enamestr += strlen (enamestr) + 1;
> : ! 	      bfd_put_16 (abfd, i, (void *) eordinals);
> : ! 	      enameptrs++;
> :   	      pe_def_file->exports[s].hint = hint++;
> :   	    }
> : --- 704,722 ----
> :   	  if (!pe_def_file->exports[s].flag_noname)
> :   	    {
> :   	      char *ename = pe_def_file->exports[s].name;
> :   	      bfd_put_32 (abfd, ERVA (enamestr), (void *) enameptrs);
> : + 	      enameptrs++;
> :   	      strcpy (enamestr, ename);
> :   	      enamestr += strlen (enamestr) + 1;
> : ! 	      bfd_put_16 (abfd, ord, (void *) eordinals);
> : ! 	      eordinals++;
> :   	      pe_def_file->exports[s].hint = hint++;
> :   	    }
> 
> Why did you change the placement of the "enameptrs++" expression ?

I wrote this code a while ago, and when I went back to read it I said
to myself "Why did I put that way down there?  There must have been a
reason.  After all, I put the eordinals++ elsewhere..."  Then it
occurred to me that the eordinals++ was wrong.  So, to prevent further
confusion, I moved the enameptrs++ right up with the use of enameptrs
to keep everything consistent so that the next person who has to read
this code won't get confused.