https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32073
--- Comment #12 from Maciej W. Rozycki <macro at orcam dot me.uk> --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #10) > In which case it would also be impossible to fix anomalies there. In turn > meaning that hardly any bug in parsing of input can actually be fixed. Not a > good state to be in. How would you respond to a bug report in such an area > then? "We know it's broken, but it can't be fixed"? Where does the notion of using whitespace for argument separation in macro invocations (as opposed to definitions) come from? I can see it was you actually who documented this feature in the GAS manual back in 2022 only. But if GAS does accept whitespace here, then isn't it just a GAS regression that needs fixing instead? Is there any substantial piece of software out there known to rely on this previously undocumented feature (and why)? How does the use of whitespace for argument separation mix with default values anyway? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
