This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Exception Handling description
Hi,
On Sun, 17 May 2009, Michael Eager wrote:
> If the LSDA is only interpreted by the personality routine pointed to
> by the unwind table, then all that should be needed is to describe the
> the functionality of that routine.
Yep, that was what my confusion above was about, if the LSDA format
specifically should also be described. I consider describing it in an ABI
in a normative part to be actually harmful on the grounds that it's not
necessary but would prevent future changes of the format (without ABI
changes) ...
> Itanium C++ ABI on the CodeSourcery site.) The details on how to generate
> the LSDA would likely be an appendix showing an example implementation.
... whereas this of course would be something useful.
> The ABI would also need to say something about the name or linkage of
> the personality routine, so that if different compilations have
> different routines, they won't collide.
> (The AMD64 ABI says that there is no psABI-specified name, but that
> doesn't prevent collisions.)
Indeed. The question is if the ABI should try to prevent such collisions
(it would have to list all existing current symbols and be amended
whenever someone invents a new one). I'm undecided.
Ciao,
Michael.