Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 16:30:04 +0200 (WET)
From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patch: sentinels for typedefs in headers
In-Reply-To: <200006141334.JAA05400@envy.delorie.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.4.05.10006141622240.32182-100000@ieva06.lanet.lv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk



On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, DJ Delorie wrote:

> 
> > DJ, do we have any reason not to use GCC's definition of va_list?
> 
> I don't remember what, if any, my original complaint about this was.
> 

gcc/ginclude/stdarg.h uses builtin gcc functions for va_list, va_arg, etc.
So unless there is a bug in gcc they should correpond the real stack
layout. If we provide our own definitions (like DJGPP's stdarg.c) we
should carefully verify that none of gcc options that influences data
alignment in stack (-mpreferred-stack-boundary) doesn't break it.

I think it would be better to use gcc builtin definitions if possible.

Andris