Pierre Muller wrote:
> 
>>>   For instance, your patch does not complaint about this
>>>         .stabs  "t30:t(0,30)=@s8;r(0,30);02000;0077;",128,0,0,0
>>> but 02000 is -1024 and does not fit into a 8 bit memory.
>>>
>> Right.  Does this really ever happen?  A check can be added then...
>   For good behaving compilers, probably not,
> but it never hurts to be on the sure size and to be able
> to report if some input is malformed.
> 
>   I would really appreciate that report an error
> whenever the number cannot be parsed correctly.
> 
>>>   I agree that there are normally no reasons to have more digits,
>>> but more  leading zeroes should not lead to an error
>> They don't, AFAICS.
>>
>>> ... in the parsing
>>> and any bit set higher that this should trigger an error.
>>>
>> OK ...
>>

Updated patch attached, as per your comments.

Regtested on i386-pc-cygwin, C/C++.

Cheers,
Pedro Alves