This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow


Eric Botcazou wrote:
Once again, have you actually examined how awtul the code we
generate now is?


Yes, I have. Indeed not pretty, but suppose that we managed to cut the overhead in half, would that make -gnato really more attractive?

Yes, it would definitely make the difference, given the figures we have seen.

From that, we have 2 alternatives: synchronous or asynchronous exceptions.
The current implementation is synchronous, as we explicitly raise exceptions in the code by calling a routine. I guess you're pushing for asynchronous exceptions since this is probably the only efficient approach, i.e. we rely on the hardware to trap and try to recover from that.

Defintiely not, integer overflow generates async traps on very few architectures. Certainly synchronous traps can be generated (e.g. with into on the x86).




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