[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] objdump patch

From: Erik Christiansen
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] objdump patch
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 15:46:03 +1000
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 04:39:27PM +0200, Svein E. Seldal wrote:
> The snippet below shows the changes that I suggest. In short:
> 20c:       02 c0           rjmp    .+4             ; 0x212
> becomes
> 20c:       02 c0           rjmp    0x212 <.do_copy_data_start>     ; .+4
> Does this look nice?  Its downside is that it kind of ruins the 
> right-aliged row of ';' and makes the output more cluttered. But on the 
> upside, it proves it faster and simpler to review code.
> What I really want to discuss is if we do need the "; .+4" comment in 
> the example above or not. I dont think I will ever need that 
> information, but I'm humble if anyone else protests.


The symbol beneficially replaces the relative reference, both in an
abstract sense and in practical use, doesn't it? I'd very definitely
spend my 2 cents on your clutter reduced alternative, and increase the
separation of the symbol, for readability.

20c:       02 c0           rjmp    0x212     <.do_copy_data_start>

Where no symbol is available, I suppose we end up with

20c:       02 c0           rjmp    0x212     ; .+4

Right alignment is then not bad at all, is it?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]