On Thu, 2013-12-05 14:22:46 -0700, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/05/13 14:17, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> >diff --git a/gcc/config/score/score.h b/gcc/config/score/score.h
> >index 5ab7875..e3bb7f0 100644
> >--- a/gcc/config/score/score.h
> >+++ b/gcc/config/score/score.h
> >@@ -757,11 +757,12 @@ typedef struct score_args
> > entries PC-relative in GP-relative when .gp(d)word is supported. */
> > #define ASM_OUTPUT_ADDR_DIFF_ELT(STREAM, BODY, VALUE, REL) \
> > do { \
> >- if (TARGET_SCORE7) \
> >+ if (TARGET_SCORE7) { \
> > if (flag_pic) \
> > fprintf (STREAM, "\t.gpword %sL%d\n", LOCAL_LABEL_PREFIX, VALUE); \
> > else \
> > fprintf (STREAM, "\t.word %sL%d\n", LOCAL_LABEL_PREFIX, VALUE); \
> >+ } \
> > } while (0)
> >
> > /* Jump table alignment is explicit in ASM_OUTPUT_CASE_LABEL. */
> Formatting nit. The open curley should be on its own line, indented
> 2 spaces relative to its conditional. Its close paren should also
> be on its own line at the same indention level as the open curley.
>
> Note this will cause all the code inside the new curleys to need to
> be reindented as well.
I know! But look at the code around the macro I touched: It's all
formatted that way, so I decided to stay with that style. (As well as
the trailing '\' are indented all the way with spaces.)
So... Rework it all to use common indention? Or change it only right
here? Or propose another patch changing it to the usual indention style?
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481
Signature of: 17:44 <@uschebit> Evangelist ist doch ein Vertriebler
the second : für unverkäufliche Produkte, oder? (#korsett, 20120821)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
