This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: va_arg *, and why not.

To: gdr at codesourcery dot com
Subject: Re: va_arg *, and why not.
From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 22:24:29 -0700
Cc: geoffk at cygnus dot com, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <flvgy5xsqr.fsf@sel.cmla.ens-cachan.fr><20000716220100M.mitchell@codesourcery.com><flsnt9wd5p.fsf@sel.cmla.ens-cachan.fr>

>>>>> "Gabriel" == Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com> writes:

    Gabriel> Hmm, I'm confused there.  I was under the impression that
    Gabriel> it was taking the address of a va_list function argument
    Gabriel> that was not portable.  Furthermore, in his proposed
    Gabriel> resolution using va_copy was one option.

But with the caveat that there be a libiberty/system.h equivalent to
handle systems that do not define va_copy.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: va_arg *, and why not.
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

References:
- Re: va_arg *, and why not.
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: va_arg *, and why not.
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: va_arg *, and why not.
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]