This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [basic-improvements] try/finally support for c/c++ - more tests
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, "zack at codesourcery dot com" <zack at codesourcery dot com>, "jakub at redhat dot com" <jakub at redhat dot com>, "aldyh at redhat dot com" <aldyh at redhat dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "jason at redhat dot com" <jason at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 04:26:58 -0800
- Subject: Re: [basic-improvements] try/finally support for c/c++ - more tests
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 04:07:09AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> I fail to see how longjmp_unwind could possibly be implemented without
> EH frame information for all frames, C ones included.
The idea I has was that it unwound frames until (1) we arrive at
the destination frame or (2) we don't find any more EH information,
at which point it falls back to just longjmp.
This does require that all EH-bearing frames appear at the bottom
of the call chain, but I think it does handle the common case of
an all-C++ or all-C pthreads application.
It's only people who mix C and C++ that have to be more careful
about using -fexceptions with their C code.