Re: [PATCH] Re: .macro behavior

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>]

>>> Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> 01.04.05 16:27:14 >>>
>Hi Jan,
>
>> gas/
>> 2005-03-29  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@novell.com>
>> 
>> 	* NEWS: Mention these changes and their effects.
>> 	* macro.c (get_token): Use is_name_beginner/is_part_of_name/
>> 	is_name_ender.
>> 	(check_macro): Likewise.
>> 	(buffer_and_nest): Likewise. Permit multiple labels. Don't discard
>> 	labels together with the closing pseudo-op.
>> 	(macro_expand_body): Adjust comment. Range-check input before use.
>> 	Adjust mis-spelled diagnostic. Use is_name_beginner.
>> 	* read.c (try_macro): New.
>> 	(read_a_source_file): New static variable last_eol. Don't list
>> 	macro expansion lines more than once. Call try_macro.
>> 	(s_macro): Set section of line_label to absolute instead of undefined.
>> 
>> gas/testsuite/
>> 2005-03-29  Jan Beulich  <jbeulich@novell.com>
>> 
>> 	* gas/macros/dot.[ls]: New.
>> 	* gas/macros/macros.exp: Run new test.
>
>Approved - please apply.
>
>One request though.  Would it be possible to add entry to the assembler 
>documentation about this new feature, and in particular a lengthier 
>description of:
>
>"...this is known to cause problems in certain sources when the
>  respective target uses characters inconsistently, and thus macro
>  parameter references are no longer recognized as such."
>
>With an example and a suggested workaround.

Done.