This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?


On Friday, June 10, 2005, at 03:04 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
Part of the question is "how bss sections are named" according
to evolution, or some crystal clear standard, or what ?

Ultimately, people just pick names. Once picked, they form crystal clear standards.


Would matching, say, ".bss" anywhere-in or at-the-end-of name be
appropriate?

No, the standard is to be prefix based, this simplifies the impact on the linker scripts.

Ok. So a new category of bss sections could be matched by "X.bss" or "X.bss."*. Would that be reasonable?

_prefix_, not suffix. No. You'd first have to explain why the existing standard of prefix can't be made to work I think. .bss.X would be the convention to use.



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