Re: RFA: consolidate DWARF strings into libiberty

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "DJ" == DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com> writes:

Tom> Finally, there is already stuff in libiberty not related to
Tom> portability.  E.g., hashtab or the demangler.

DJ> Yeah, I know, hence my "Should I give up that premise?"

Yeah.

I am not sure there will ever be enough shared code to warrant a new
library, particularly because adding a new library is so expensive --
not just the configury stuff but also adding it to the link lines in the
Makefiles of all the tools that might need it.

I suppose if I had my wish list implemented here, it would be to remove
the portability stuff from libiberty in favor of gnulib, and keep
libiberty as a higher-level library.

Tom> I guess I can just put the whole DW_TAG_ prefix in there.  That
Tom> isn't a big deal.  Or if you have some other suggestion, I can
Tom> implement it.

DJ> If the macros always prepend something to it, it should be safe
DJ> enough, despite technically violating the spirit of the rule.  I have
DJ> no other suggestions.

DJ> But given you've already had the issue with "and", you're already
DJ> seeing problems anyway, so maybe that's a sign that it's not actually
DJ> "safe enough" ?

I think this arises from a bug in cpp, since it issues the -Wc++-compat
warning even if the token in question is only used as an argument to
stringizing.  This seems mistaken -- but it seemed advisable to work
around it.

Tom