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: PATCH: provide pass-through value in bfd_elf_bfd_from_remote_memory

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:43:45 -0400
Subject: Re: PATCH: provide pass-through value in bfd_elf_bfd_from_remote_memory
References: <vt265o4ulma.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com> <3ECBDCC4.3000302@redhat.com> <vt2addgt588.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com>

Well, I'm more than happy to follow any existing convention.  But
where are there other pointers named 'context'?  As far as I can see,
there is no convention for naming these little pass-through pointers.

I know it has something - OBJ vis:

void
bfd_map_over_sections PARAMS ((bfd *abfd,
    void (*func) (bfd *abfd,
    asection *sect,
    PTR obj),
    PTR obj));

Andrew

References:
- PATCH: provide pass-through value in bfd_elf_bfd_from_remote_memory
  - From: Jim Blandy
- Re: PATCH: provide pass-through value in bfd_elf_bfd_from_remote_memory
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: PATCH: provide pass-through value in bfd_elf_bfd_from_remote_memory
  - From: Jim Blandy

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