This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: va_arg *, and why not.
- To: gdr at codesourcery dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com
- Subject: Re: va_arg *, and why not.
- From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:14:17 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, geoffk at cygnus dot com
> From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
>
> >>>>> "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.
FYI, system.h already defines a backup va_copy. I don't know if it's
*correct*, but it does exist. You may wish to verify it DTRT.
--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu Qwest Internet Solutions