|
|
|
| Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 11:55 PM EDT |
> What of 'several possible' meanings do you have for
> "containing" ?
Only one. The symbolic reference must be part of the instruction. The debate is
not over this word.
I had several alternatives to what could count as a symbolic reference. I did
not take for granted that a pointer to a symbol which must be resolved with a
look up table didn't count as a symbolic reference for example. If an
instruction contains such a pointer, that could possibly count as an instruction
containing a symbolic reference if we use a construction which accepts a pointer
to a string meant to be resolved as a symbolic reference.
See? Same meaning for "containing", different meanings for
"symbolic reference". The question is whether this symbolic reference
term refers to the literal string or does some form of an indirection pointing
to such a string count as well. Both positions can be argued. It is not clear
that the word "containing" must apply to a literal string unless it is
decided that "symbolic reference" must mean a literal string. This is
really a situation where reasonable minds can disagree.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
