On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:29:48AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Secondly, we use lots of the the "small numbers for local labels" both > in inline asm and in *.S files. > > I think doing > > jne 1f > ... > 1: > > is a _hell_ of a lot more legible than > > jne .LPrefix_% > ... > .LPrefix_% > > unless you have some *major* reason to use an explicit label name.
Small number maybe; but the value at hand was a random 999 or so, which is not a small number. But I find a descriptive label ever so much better than a random number. > Sure, if you grew up writing perl, and think that an illegible mess of > random characters is a requirement for programming, then the ".L%" > format looks natural. I grew up on BASIC and have bad memories of random big number goto. I'll take those random trailing character any day if it includes human readable bits before. > But if you're an actual human, the "small numbers as labels" is fine. I find descriptive labels much nicer than random numbers, I'll take some crazy characters if so required. Consider the retpoline thing: call .Lset_up_target .Lcapture_spec: pause jmp .Lcapture_spec .Lset_up_target: mov %r11, (%rsp); ret; over: call 2f 1: pause jmp 1b 2: mov %r11, (%rsp) ret give me the first any day of the week.
