Re: gas: should duplicate .macro directives be allowed?

[Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>]

"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> writes:

> Yes, the change was deliberate, and I don't think it'd be wise to revert
> it (it's simply dangerous considering that you might have these
> collisions resulting from two include files, each of which relies on
> their definition of the respective macro). Instead, if you need to
> override a previous macro definition (and know what you're doing), you
> can use easily use .purgem before the new definition (really, I'd rather
> recommend not to to catch the collision). Jan

That seems more or less reasonable to me, but Daniel is correct that
this change must be mentioned in NEWS.  It should be documented
somewhere in as.texinfo as well, if it is not already.

Ian