This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc conformance to HP-PA ABI
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: gcc conformance to HP-PA ABI
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- Date: Sat, 8 Jul 00 08:18:25 EDT
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, hainque at act-europe dot fr
Better to hack it in the direction we'd like to go (dwarf2 unwinders)
than in a direction we do not want to go (compatible with HP's
unwinder library).
Why is that a direction we don't want to go? Isn't it always better for GC
to be compatible with as many vendor features as possible? Shouldn't we be
able to mix vendor- and GCC-built object files when processing exceptions?
What about linking with third-party libraries and propagating exceptions
through them? Wouldn't that be simpler if using HP's unwinder library?