> -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Also, for a single parameter like a comment char, I don't think we need to go > creating a separate structure. The current flags parameter is unused, so just > replace it with the comment char one. With using the structure, any additions In my earlier patch, I proprose using a "global" flag to indicate that an unnamed section exists so the flags argument would still be needed.
> to the struct would be an ABI change anyway, so I see little point in using > it, > unless we already know of additional parameters we will be adding in future. We already have 2 parameters in mind - flags, and comment char. I don't feel that combining the two in a single enum is particularly good since it would be better to allow the application the freedom to set an arbitrary comment character and not be locked in to any static list that we choose (see my previous email response).
