On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 11:25 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> Wouldn't the new definition just work always?
Yes but it will no longer sanity check the two implementations have the same
prototype. Which may be useful in many (most?) use cases of it.
Makes sense.
> (I still don't fully understand that last asm bit).
info '(gcc)Asm Labels'
IIUC there was an intention that someone cannot call the
compatibility-only-variant by accident (as one cannot call a function from
C containing '.' dot). Sure even the caller could use the asm label to call
this '_compat.ELFUTILS_0.122.dwfl_report_elf' function but if the caller knows
how to use the asm label s/he should know it is not right to call this one.
Aha, clever.
Looks good to me. I think you should check it in unless Roland has some
comments on it.
Thanks,
Mark