------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2006-07-26 10:41 ------- Subject: Re: macro name syntax changed
Hi Roman, > You read it correctly, the intention is to provide the opcodes > foo.b/foo.w/foo.l, so using "foo .l" would be even more confusing. OK, so presumably a workaround is to provide individual macros with the names "foo.b", "foo.w" and so on, rather than just one macro. > The point is that gas broke compatibility here, so I can't provide > such opcodes at all anymore. Hmm, well the change was to make macros names consistent with other names. ie if string was a valid name for a (pseudo) opcode or a label, then it could also be a valid name for a macro. I appreciate however that this did break backwards compatibility. So please could you try out the uploaded patch and let me know if it works for you. (You will need to add the command line switch --no-dot-in-macro-names to assembler command line). Cheers Nick -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2848 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
