> From: Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Don't we know which labels are targets of indirect jumps? > So the proposed restriction now becomes: functions *and targets of indirect > jumps* must be aligned to an N word boundary. I'd guess that the latter are > sufficiently rare that this is still an acceptable restriction.
- seams plausible, if it were reasonably easy to identify such labels to the linker with a corresponding alignment requirement to the exclusion of all other labels? (and the restricted alignment method were deemed acceptable?)
