From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7EF93893656 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:23:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A7EF93893656 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1668511431; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=S91NOak6jP7haw5SuRyLFlTY6pHs2iNczoc5BdWLM2E=; b=gsUlm74CBjIscn/RS+QNnAN73wDVEEuXY6yI5R8ga+GIWjRaM+N4YjytmMGlQWjcdCuo28 95bTdhgCM8kUZiHX54yDC2oGj+uXYoDNXN29SSbwctkOMJhC/8LRPow1PfN+hxjPIEXDFk UzDMH9+l2WaEWAWoLSlL1G3HF7EifGw= Received: from mail-qt1-f199.google.com (mail-qt1-f199.google.com [209.85.160.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-139-W-rKTtrlN128ANj2SEriqA-1; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 06:23:50 -0500 X-MC-Unique: W-rKTtrlN128ANj2SEriqA-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f199.google.com with SMTP id g3-20020ac84b63000000b003a529c62a92so10110974qts.23 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 03:23:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:subject:from:references:cc:to :content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=S91NOak6jP7haw5SuRyLFlTY6pHs2iNczoc5BdWLM2E=; b=M+ONtxNmML3/t+CcfXGxktNZw0lifMpj0B3dNHq4Lbc7zPiOLbTib4NImNTxKGIkHL VHxU+r/1qhOpwy0aqH7lN4GZC6kK37NwnEzlooCW+DOMH2EBpiBhMMpRT+4akl072Icf 5Xp8qSBCMn1ZXZ9xmObv85Cf1pz5QYHHx9QFboldMzg9cTzzhZLbUjrdIRQ1kzwRMGOg cbr+F0JF7VoX2FMiqolT3146tP3oIyigMRsacLewIQddlqO1hvUfn+2JQozPFKhWAPg5 waY+KKAz+k+JTAWjQZ/ZC/fffK/L6vQCg9pPqnMXLQpljGgkBXYYVtgqM/S0/t0dDIUe fpsA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkYO7iWo4uf7CcQ/YiQ8gsWlRZJkl5GoVVJdy7JOTwSFSE1ZTDi UPnX/sQVJaCiG5Z4FuD4ecBRtx4wV2BctbcdEiUT4TcoArQwC0cSVLC1HGXQaPlCcJthJE+z7cg 4DNtRqcEC/PpjKVwxYA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:43cd:0:b0:35c:f2e5:a673 with SMTP id w13-20020ac843cd000000b0035cf2e5a673mr16249165qtn.232.1668511429547; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 03:23:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5/CFnSHfIunrO8vilWL3aB9AWkRD/SOc9NMTDulaJAhHSZJ/360niiAZqWo8Ne7QyDgodn/g== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:43cd:0:b0:35c:f2e5:a673 with SMTP id w13-20020ac843cd000000b0035cf2e5a673mr16249153qtn.232.1668511429321; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 03:23:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.18] (adsl-164-85.freeuk.com. [80.168.164.85]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k21-20020ac84795000000b003a569a0afcasm6934928qtq.66.2022.11.15.03.23.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Nov 2022 03:23:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0efc9f53-1298-a5c5-333e-c488beb26360@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:23:47 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1 To: Jan Beulich Cc: Binutils References: <40e89395-1438-6cbe-aa37-1a04a724c8c7@suse.com> <8587d119-b296-57b5-d99f-d30f3ec7c846@redhat.com> <77dc27ff-3293-4073-29e2-b9ee1a00016a@suse.com> From: Nick Clifton Subject: Re: [PATCH] gas: accept custom ".linefile ." In-Reply-To: <77dc27ff-3293-4073-29e2-b9ee1a00016a@suse.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-GB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Jan, >>> abort (); >> >> I still hate having calls to abort() in code. Much better to have >> a helpful error message IMHO. Not important for this patch though. > > So do you consider gas_assert() better? Not really. It still does not tell the user what has gone wrong, nor does it help them avoid the problem. Sure they can report it, and having an abort makes it easier for an investigator to use a debugger to catch the problem, but in the meantime the user is still left wondering what went wrong. The assembler (and other tools) already have a well understood way of telling the user that something has gone wrong - the exit status code, along with, hopefully, an error message. So I think that it is best to make use of it. > But perhaps such could also be as_fatal(). Given a choice, I would definitely prefer as_fatal() over gas_assert() or abort(). But this is just my preference. I am not laying down the law here, and I am not going to reject patches just because they contain calls to abort. Cheers Nick