https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #9) > > > It is more important for gas to be consistent with itself. > > That's a bogus goal imo: Different assembly syntax can naturally result in Not to me. > apparent inconsistencies. > > > In the case of "fs:gs:[eax]", you can replace it with > > "fs:[eax]" to get the same output. > > In straight line code yes. But what if a first override is hidden deep in a > macro you can't or don't want to modify, but you need to add an override to > in one special case? Do you have a real example? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
