[Bug gas/32073] [2.44 Regression] gas failed to build x86-64 Linux kernel

[jbeulich at suse dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32073

--- Comment #8 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com> ---
(In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #5)
> Yet then documentation is unclear on whether there may be whitespace between
> the \ and the parameter name. We could of course make macro expansion skip
> whitespace when a valid parameter name follows. Yet I fear there could be
> other anomalies as a result.

I've looked into what the options are of fixing this particular issue. Dealing
with the one question of "should blanks be skipped here" quickly turns into a
series of such questions, perhaps one for every individual transformation that
is done while expanding a macro:
- Is \( a token, or can there be whitespace?
- Are \@ and \+ tokens, or can there be whitespace?
- There's also \& with a comment alluding to preprocessor variables.
- Is & used for macro parameter references permitted to be followed by
whitespace? If so, what about the optional trailing & ?
- Same for @.
My intuitive answers to these wouldn't all be the same. For example I'd be more
inclined to not permit whitespace in @name@ references. Yet I don't even know
the origin of that kind of construct, so how should I be able to tell?

Plus of course there's then also the question of whether whitespace should
survive when processing something that looks like a param ref, but really isn't
(as can easily be the case in nested macros).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.