Hi Janus,
Janus Weil wrote:
When backporting to 4.6 and 4.7, do you intend to also bump the module
version there? Does that make sense?
Probably not. The .__result and the .saved_dovar are not ABI relevant,
thus, they can be changed without problems - but also not that
important. The module variable is more crucial, but I think we should
avoid bumping the module version. I think we should only change the trunk.
Moreover, ".__result" probably goes back even further than 4.6, right?
Presumably yes.
Janus Weil wrote:
One more comment: Since its appearance is a bit scattered in the code,
how about using a small macro which prepends the "_F" prefix to a
given variable name?
Btw, note that we are using a double underscore scheme in other places
(like __class, __vtab, __vtype, etc). I have even used an '@' in one
place, namely (hidden) procedure pointer results ("ppr@"). Is there a
need to unify all those cases?
It think it would be useful to unify those. Are you volunteering?
Regarding the "@": GCC only has: NO_DOLLAR_IN_LABEL and NO_DOT_IN_LABEL.
However, I would be also careful with the @ label.
The @ has also a special meaning to assemblers. However, if the name
with the @ is not publicly visible, the name does not occur in the
assembler file (except as string for the debug information). Thus, there
should be no real problem. Still, one should consider to change also
them to the _F convention.
Tobias
