From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 708803851C1C for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:24:02 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 708803851C1C Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-563-4A3_-AWdO7O6SXLZYd95Cg-1; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 08:24:00 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 4A3_-AWdO7O6SXLZYd95Cg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58A368015DB; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:23:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-173.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.173]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 934AC19C4F; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:23:58 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Jozef Lawrynowicz Cc: gnu-gabi@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal for new ELF extension - "Symbol meta-information" References: <20200831115859.mwcruabbzoj3x4w7@jozef-acer-manjaro> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:23:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20200831115859.mwcruabbzoj3x4w7@jozef-acer-manjaro> (Jozef Lawrynowicz's message of "Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:58:59 +0100") Message-ID: <875z8zj95u.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gnu-gabi@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnu-gabi mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 12:24:03 -0000 * Jozef Lawrynowicz: > I wonder if it is appropriate for inclusion in the GNU gABI or if we > should just add it to a processor-specific ABI. However, it is being > used downstream for MSP430 and ARM targets, in GCC and Clang/LLVM > respectively. So we'd like to have it standardized somewhere generic > so that different targets and toolchains can align on it. Is there an expectation to upstream these changes? In the present state there does not seem to be need for such coordination. > 3.3.3 SMT_PRINTF_FMT use case Can this achieved in C++ with a library-only solution? So that printf ("%s", str); and printf ("%f", num); resolve to different printf symbols externally? Thanks, Florian