RE: Generated unique labels

[James Buchanan <jamesbuch@iprimus.com.au>]

I prefer this option that Joseph has given, if possible.  Using assembler local
labels means different labels for different types of assembler, doesn't it?  A
platform independent label generator is probably best.  Then again, I don't
really know, or understand what exactly the requirements of these labels are.

At 01:41 AM 1/2/2003 -0600, Joseph D. Wagner wrote:
>I don't know if this will work or not, but it's worth a shot.
>
>Uses C++
>
>Joseph Wagner
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
>James Buchanan
>Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:32 AM
>To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>Subject: Generated unique labels
>
>In the Projects file:
>
>===
>Generated unique labels. Have some way of generating distinct
>labels for use in extended asm statements. I don't know what a
>good syntax would be.
>===
>
>Has this been done yet?  If not has anyone been assigned to it?
>
>Where would this be done?  What is an extended asm statement,
>is this asm code generated by the back end?  Is there any
>distinction between asm and extended asm?  So things peculiar
>to local labels can't be used?
>
>Would this be a function, let's say:
>
>...in file uniquelabel.h
>
>char *
>gen_unique_label();
>
>...in file uniquelabel.c
>char *
>gen_unique_label()
>{
>         /* Get some memory or just return a pointer?? */
>         char *the_label = (char *)safe_malloc();
>
>         /*
>         Let's say we only use a static char array
>         and return a pointer to it.  The caller gets it
>         and copies the string straight away, but
>         this seems silly.  Functions should take
>         care of it.
>         */
>
>         /*
>         Or perhaps allocate a string, the caller
>         can do free(the_label)
>         */
>
>         /* do stuff */
>         return (the_label);
>}
>
>?
>
>