dwarf2out.c/ASM_OUTPUT_ASCII,ASM_OUTPUT_DWARF_STRING

[Philippe De Muyter]

>   > PS : dwarf2out.c in egcs and testgcc are different for no reason :
>   > macro name, assert instead of if () abort(),...
> No, it's for a good reason.
> 
> Using "assert.h" like the old dwarfout/dwarf2out code is extremely bad.
> 
> Consider what happens on systems which have gcc already installed, but
> no __eprintf in their existing libgcc.a -- they fail to build because
> the dwarf code picks up gcc's assert.h, which references __eprintf,
> which doesn't exist in libgcc.a.

Sorry, my wording was not clear enough.  I only meant that I do not see
anything 'experimental' in the differences between the egcs and testgcc
versions of dwarf2out.c, and that it would thus be better if they were
identical.  Can one of the maintainer for gcc/dwarf2out.c update the
testgcc version to be identiacl to the egcs version ?