This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [3.3] Followup to C++ forced unwinding


On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 22:13, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 09:49:32PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > Now that we've made you rewrite your patch for the nth time, how close
> > are you to being done? :-)
> 
> Fairly close, I think.

Good.

> We still need to notice which ISO C functions are POSIX
> cancellation points, but I suggest we simply do this all the
> time rather than under the control of some flag -- the benefit
> of doing otherwise will surely be minimal.

Agreed.  In fact, as Nathan Myers points out, if we can compile code so
that it works either single-thread or multi-threaded, that's a big win. 
So, if we just always assume that POSIX cancellation points can throw, I
think that's fine.

Thanks,

> -- 
> Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
> CodeSourcery, LLC


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]