Better handling of PIC suffixes in GAS expression parser

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Alexandre,

> I'm willing to come up with a saner way to do it, but I'm first going
> to take a poll on which way people think would be best.

I have been trying to think of something useful to say, but since I
have not explored this code I am not familiar with the problems.

> - adding machine-specific fields to expressions (which is already
> possible), but introducing a mechanism for the machine-specific code
> to validate the combination of expressions, as well as determining how
> the additional fields should be set for the combined expression.

I like the sound of this method.  It sounds reasonably generic, and
like something that could be extended to other, non-PIC related
situations.

> - generating PIC-related symbols as local symbols, adding
> machine-specific fields to them, and having validation done
> externally, after the full expression is parsed and constructed, when
> the relocation type is about to be chosen.

I am not so sure that I understand this.  Are you suggesting that "@GOT"
would become a special local symbol ?

Cheers
        Nick