This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java 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: why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?

From: Andrew Haley <aph at cambridge dot redhat dot com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org, Adam Megacz <gcj at lists dot megacz dot com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 18:07:59 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?
References: <86wuxxmxck.fsf@megacz.com><15450.40500.66343.724761@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com><20020201091915.B10263@redhat.com>

Richard Henderson writes:
 > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 01:55:00PM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > We're baffled by this.  Why does SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS code need the
 > > call-site table?  Something to do with
 > 
 > The call site table allows us to call setjmp just and handle any
 > exception within the function.  The previous implementation had
 > to call setjmp many times, which bloated the code quite a bit.

Okay.  Is this scheme compatible with binary file formats like
Windows' weird version of coff, or does it require special ELF
sections?

Andrew.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?
  - From: Richard Henderson

References:
- why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?
  - From: Adam Megacz
- why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: why does exception.cc have "unwinding" code for sjlj?
  - From: Richard Henderson

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