From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-24569-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 4510 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2003 20:41:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 4501 invoked from network); 26 Feb 2003 20:41:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO dair.pair.com) (209.68.1.49)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 26 Feb 2003 20:41:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 75832 invoked by uid 20157); 26 Feb 2003 20:41:19 -0000
Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 26 Feb 2003 20:41:19 -0000
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:00 -0000
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com>
X-X-Sender: hp@dair.pair.com
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd'
In-Reply-To: <3E59C04D.3040304@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0302261440030.41480-100000@dair.pair.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00457.txt.bz2

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> The attached renames the BFD object to `struct bfd' from `struct _bfd'.
>   To ensure backward compatibility with existing code it also #defines
> _bfd -> bfd.

Would this break using bfd from C++?
Or building with pre-ISOC89 compilers?  (Ouch!  Don't hit me! ;-)

> Having `struct bfd' available will, I think, legitimize its use as an
> opaque declaration vis:
>
> 	struct bfd;
> 	void func (struct bfd *abfd);

And "bfd *" does not fit that purpose?

> Also, as far as I know, symbols with a leading `_' live in the system
> name space.

No, it's _ followed by upper-case letter, e.g "_Z".

brgds, H-P