On Sunday 15 January 2012 10:02:07 Rich Felker wrote: > On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 07:34:22PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > They expand into the same code, but using the ELF_xxx()/ElfW() macros > > makes it much easier to spot similarities between code bases. > > It would of course be much simpler to use size_t, uint32_t, etc. as > appropriate.
no it wouldn't. it would require people having to look up the backing types all the time in the spec which gets tedious (not to mention buggy) real fast. it also isn't possible when talking about things like Elf32_xxx structs (such as Elf32_Shdr or Elf32_Ehdr). > really ridiculous how much code is considered arch-specific in the > glibc and uclibc dynamic linkers. work is constantly on going to shrink them. if you're interested in helping, then post patches or *specific suggestions*, otherwise don't bother complaining since it really isn't helpful. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
