RE: Generated unique labels

[James Buchanan <jamesbuch at iprimus dot com dot au>]

I prefer this option that Joseph has given, if possible.  Using assembler local
labels means different labels for different types of assembler, doesn't it?  A
platform independent label generator is probably best.  Then again, I don't
really know, or understand what exactly the requirements of these labels are.

At 01:41 AM 1/2/2003 -0600, Joseph D. Wagner wrote:
> I don't know if this will work or not, but it's worth a shot.
>
> Uses C++
>
> Joseph Wagner
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> James Buchanan
> Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:32 AM
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Generated unique labels
>
> In the Projects file:
>
> ===
> Generated unique labels. Have some way of generating distinct
> labels for use in extended asm statements. I don't know what a
> good syntax would be.
> ===
>
> Has this been done yet?  If not has anyone been assigned to it?
>
> Where would this be done?  What is an extended asm statement,
> is this asm code generated by the back end?  Is there any
> distinction between asm and extended asm?  So things peculiar
> to local labels can't be used?
>
> Would this be a function, let's say:
>
> ...in file uniquelabel.h
>
> char *
> gen_unique_label();
>
> ...in file uniquelabel.c
> char *
> gen_unique_label()
> {
>         /* Get some memory or just return a pointer?? */
>         char *the_label = (char *)safe_malloc();
>
>         /*
>         Let's say we only use a static char array
>         and return a pointer to it.  The caller gets it
>         and copies the string straight away, but
>         this seems silly.  Functions should take
>         care of it.
>         */
>
>         /*
>         Or perhaps allocate a string, the caller
>         can do free(the_label)
>         */
>
>         /* do stuff */
>         return (the_label);
> }
>
> ?