Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site hou4b.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!houxm!vax135!ariel!hou4b!mat From: mat@hou4b.UUCP (Mark Terribile) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: Dollars and Sense Message-ID: <1262@hou4b.UUCP> Date: Tue, 8-Jan-85 21:45:48 EST Article-I.D.: hou4b.1262 Posted: Tue Jan 8 21:45:48 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 9-Jan-85 08:15:55 EST References: <20980043@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ Lines: 24 >Using "asm( whatever )" to change the names of symbols is flawed for the >same reasons assembly language output processing is. There are compilers >which neither put out assembly language nor have the capability to interpret >unusual (or any) "asm" statements. >I think the best idea so far was improving linkers so that they can do it. >Another option is to write programs for the various systems that filter >object files' symbol tables to change the names as desired. > Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University Computation Center But Tim, there are some brain-damaged systems that only allow ``privileged'' programs to tinker with object files. The HP3000 is on such system. In order to protect the integrity of the OS, never mind user programs, the segmentation control has to be enforced by the assembler and linker ... and what's worse, the program has a final link needed when the program is loaded to run. THAT linker is built into the OS. Perhaps your real-world CS is as colored as your philosophy :-) (THAT discussion by private mail, please) -- from Mole End Mark Terribile (scrape .. dig ) hou4b!mat ,.. .,, ,,, ..,***_*.