This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa mudflap] preferred technique for wrapping symbols?
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> 2002-08-13 Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com>
>
> * gcc.c (MFWRAP_SPEC, MFLIB_SPEC): New macros, splitting MFLIB_SPEC.
> (mfwrap_spec, mflib_spec): Define corresponding vars.
> (static_specs): Define correponding spec aliases.
> (LINK_COMMAND_SPEC): Include -fmudflap refs to new spec aliases.
> (cpp_unique_options): Move -fmudflap MFCPP_SPEC clause here.
> (cc1_options): Move -fmudflap MFCC1_SPEC clause here.
> (MFCC1_SPEC, MFCPP_SPEC, MFLIB_SPEC): Remove macros and uses.
>
Not really my area, but if it bootstraps and doesn't cause
regressions, then I guess it's OK.
Actually, I would like to get some opinions on whether there is a
different way of solving the problem. IIUC, we need to intercept
calls to common library functions to do some bookkeeping, but we
can't really do the wrapping at compile time, right?
What is exactly what we need to do in terms of bookkeeping? Why
do we care about code that we cannot process at compile time?
Could you give an example?
Thanks. Diego.