On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 11:25 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > Wouldn't the new definition just work always?
> 
> Yes but it will no longer sanity check the two implementations have the same
> prototype.  Which may be useful in many (most?) use cases of it.

Makes sense.

> > (I still don't fully understand that last asm bit).
> 
> info '(gcc)Asm Labels'
> 
> IIUC there was an intention that someone cannot call the
> compatibility-only-variant by accident (as one cannot call a function from
> C containing '.' dot).  Sure even the caller could use the asm label to call
> this '_compat.ELFUTILS_0.122.dwfl_report_elf' function but if the caller knows
> how to use the asm label s/he should know it is not right to call this one.

Aha, clever.

Looks good to me. I think you should check it in unless Roland has some
comments on it.

Thanks,

Mark

_______________________________________________
elfutils-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/elfutils-devel

Reply via email to