This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: catch(...) and forced unwind
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>
- Cc: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Nathan Myers <ncm at cantrip dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, wekempf at cox dot net, fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting dot com>, William Kempf <williamkempf at hotmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:41:57 -0800
- Subject: Re: catch(...) and forced unwind
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <xypwu91ofvf.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <ud6at1wvg.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <xypekv9nr9u.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <u65gkyhv4.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <20031214035909.GE2416@tofu.dreamhost.com> <xypk74xltaa.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <ullpdlksl.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <xyp1xr5lh5q.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <usmjlhryu.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <278A5A0A-3001-11D8-8564-00039390D9E0@apple.com> <usmjkbkb5.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <0BB52C3C-3009-11D8-8564-00039390D9E0@apple.com> <ud6aobfgy.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <A156A7B0-3012-11D8-8564-00039390D9E0@apple.com> <uu1409v32.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <xypd6aoi0zz.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com> <1071632782.3793.114.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> <897725D9-30DB-11D8-B2F3-000393B2ABA2@apple.com>
- Reply-to: mark at codesourcery dot com
On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 13:54, Matt Austern wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2003, at 9:28 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 19:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:55:13 -0500, David Abrahams
> >> <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Matt Austern <austern@apple.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> The real issue, of course is the old one: that the people defining
> >>>> the
> >>>> POSIX standard and the people defining the C++ standard didn't
> >>>> spend enough time talking to each other. POSIX doesn't know
> >>>> anything about C++ contracts.
> >>
> >>> Nor about standard C++ library functions, I presume? Why should it
> >>> have any impact on the behavior of the C++ lib from a standards POV?
> >>
> >> The two standards are incompatible as written. To make pthreads and
> >> C++
> >> play nice together, one or both need some adjustment.
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > In my opinion, the most logical way to do this is to make the following
> > changes:
>
> I wonder if this is the right forum for this discussion?
I agree that it is not.
Some people want to make changes to GCC/G++/GLIBC and so the discussion
is taking place here.
I think it would be a mistake to make those changes and check them in to
the FSF version of things without getting at least an informal buy-in
from both the POSIX threads and ISO C++ communities, but I seem to be
more conservative than most about these sorts of things.
--
Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
CodeSourcery, LLC