This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFA] Replace strdup with xstrdup in tic30-dis.c


Was the final decision from the earlier discussion as simple as:

typedef int bfd_boolean;

s/boolean/bfd_boolean
s/true/1
s/false/0

and deal with the fallout? If so, I'm willing to do the conversion and post a patch.

(After all, it's been almost a week since I broke GAS for some processor I've never heard of. What fun is that?)

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002, at 06:08 PM, Alan Modra wrote:

I'm not arguing against a "no xmalloc in new code" rule, just that an
unchecked xmalloc is better than an unchecked malloc.
Which reminds me, how is the elimination of true/false from "bfd.h" going?
Has that become my job?? ;)






Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]