This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: A completely different approach to EH runtime
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 11:13:09AM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:01:19PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > >>>>> "H J Lu" writes:
> >
> > HJL> Whatever you proposed is irrelevant to Linux if it is not blessed
> > HJL> by the glibc/Linux people. At the end of the day, the glibc/Linux
> > HJL> people have to clean up the mess. The only questions are when/how it
> > HJL> will happen and if the Linux people have to download separate patch
> > HJL> for gcc 3.0.
> >
> > Please stop referring to this as "the mess". It is not a mess
> > just because you and/or Ulrich do not like the solution. This tone is
> > simply offensive.
>
> That is one reason I call it a mess. The current scheme is a huge
> problem for Linux and the gcc people don't even want to admit it.
> I will be more than happy to be proved wrong.
This is the exact same thing as when you post obscure Makefile patches
with no explanation. We have no way of evaluating your assertion that
"the current scheme is a huge problem for Linux." All we know is that
you say it's a problem. Lots of the GCC developers don't concern
themselves with EH runtime issues at all. Those of us who know about
the EH runtime, are not also system integrators. So we don't have any
context.
You need to describe in excruciating detail exactly what will break,
and why. It is not at all obvious to us why it is a huge problem.
Convince us.
Oh, and "I don't trust you not to break the ABI in a future release"
will be read as an insult, so don't even bring it up. Assume we're
competent.
zw