This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: __attribute__((cleanup(function)) versus try/finally
> X-Original-To: geoffk@foam.wonderslug.com
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 00:39:01 -0700
> From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
> Cc: mrs@apple.com, jason@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
> Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>, mrs@apple.com, jason@redhat.com,
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Content-Disposition: inline
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 May 2003 07:41:37.0074 (UTC) FILETIME=[3FDA1920:01C319EC]
>
> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 06:14:35PM -0700, Geoff Keating wrote:
> > I wasn't thinking of changing the prologue at all; the plan would be
> > to make the object-code reader sufficiently robust that it can handle
> > most routines, and to include a check for whether this particular
> > routine can be handled by the object-code reader. The reader would
> > do things like skip over opcodes that it didn't understand.
>
> I don't like this at all. There's no way we can make
> this *that* robust. You need to have prologues in a
> canonical form, no shrink-wrapping, no complicated block
> reordering, etc.
But that's the truly neat part of the plan, you don't need to make it
robust. All you need is to be able to look at RTL and determine
whether the object-code reader will be successful in deducing the
unwind information; if it would get it wrong, you just output explicit
unwind information.
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>