From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5471 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2011 05:17:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 5463 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jul 2011 05:17:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 05:17:15 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6Q5HErI028875 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:17:14 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6Q5HErl015465; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:17:14 -0400 Received: from [0.0.0.0] (ovpn-113-48.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.48]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p6Q5H4BS014746; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:17:06 -0400 Message-ID: <4E2E4DD0.7000105@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:34:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110719 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Henderson CC: Michael Eager , Jakub Jelinek , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Tom Tromey , Jan Kratochvil , Cary Coutant , Mark Wielaard Subject: Re: [RFC] More compact (100x) -g3 .debug_gnu_macro (take 4) References: <20110713170053.GX2687@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <20110715154223.GM2687@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <4E206952.8000601@redhat.com> <20110715205817.GP2687@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <4E261290.6080004@redhat.com> <20110721112234.GM2687@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <4E285D8F.1000602@redhat.com> <4E29D57D.6070009@eagerm.com> <4E29E6BF.9050202@redhat.com> <4E29E8B4.80907@eagerm.com> <4E29E9B9.6050606@redhat.com> <4E2A0484.2060300@eagerm.com> <4E2A0639.2080605@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4E2A0639.2080605@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg02227.txt.bz2 There seems to be some violent agreement going on here. I think everyone agrees that we don't need to define anything about standard .debug_macro opcodes in the binary, that they will always mean the same thing. The question was how to establish extended opcodes, whether via a define_opcode operation or in the header. Jason