This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: New ABI EH (was Re: C++ PATCH: Switch to the new ABI)
>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Merrill <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> This was the last remaining major bit of functionality for GCC
>> 3.0; from now on, we will be focusing on compile-time
>> performance, run-time performance and robustness.
Jason> Remember that the new EH ABI has still not been
Jason> implemented, so we aren't yet compliant with the ia64 ABI;
True -- but again IA64 isn't one of our primary platforms. I think we
consciously decided to wait on IA64 until our next release due to the
general newness of the platform.
Jason> we ought to do at least enough to provide
Jason> forward-compatibility with the new ABI before gcc 3.0.
Jason> This basically means the personality routine, unwinder API
Jason> and exception model. We will eventually want to switch
Jason> over to the more efficient landing pad scheme, but that can
I'm confused. I tried to raise the issue of using the C++ bits of the
EH model with you and RTH a while back, and I thought that y'all
suggested that there was no reason to use a scheme other than our
current scheme on non-IA64 targets?
Could you clarify a little what your thinking is on this at this
point? For example, what do you want to do on IA32 w.r.t. EH?
Jason> We may be able to get a lot of this code from HP and/or
Perhaps. I take it that Red Hat is not planning on contributing any
IA64 EH C++ stuff? (I thought that you guys might be doing this as
part of your IA64 work; if you're not, then it would be helpful to
Mark Mitchell email@example.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com