You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As suggested in issue #117 in order to avoid ambiguity when selecting the sections for the size benchmark, we should select them by category rather then by name.
Categories selected through options --text, --data, --rodata and --bss should be grouped by looking at the attributes of the sections, like for elf the flags: SHF_WRITE, SHF_ALLOC, SHF_EXECINSTR.
The same should apply to the macho format, with its own flags (advice on this is welcome).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This requires input from someone with either macho expertise or some time. I've found it difficult to locate up-to-date macho documentation. Even the lief sources don't appear to be completely up-to-date.....
This proposal also raises the issue of whether to/how to maintain backward compatibility. This was a consideration for the way in which macho handling has been added.
As suggested in issue #117 in order to avoid ambiguity when selecting the sections for the size benchmark, we should select them by category rather then by name.
Categories selected through options
--text
,--data
,--rodata
and--bss
should be grouped by looking at the attributes of the sections, like for elf the flags:SHF_WRITE
,SHF_ALLOC
,SHF_EXECINSTR
.The same should apply to the macho format, with its own flags (advice on this is welcome).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: