> In addition to Segher's comments, I wonder if it would be better
> to pass &opts->x_flag_align_foo and &opts->x_str_align_jumps to
> check_alignment_argument and do the check there instead.
> The condition for whether to do this would then be:
>
> align_result.length () == 1 && align_result[0] == 0
>
> The reason for suggesting that is that it makes the parsing code
> more self-consistent, rather than using atoi for this case only.
>
Thanks, Segher and Richard!
I'll make a new patch to do the check in check_alignment_argument,
and change the condition of the if statement as follows:
align_result.length () >= 1 && align_result[0] == 0
for the input -falign-foo=n:m:n2:m2, according to documentation,
if n is zero, use the machine-dependent value. I think the implict
meaning is that even if m or n2 or m2 is specified, it should be
ignored. Any comments are appreciated!
> Looks good otherwise, thanks.
>
> Richard
>
