<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Dec 2, 2010, at 10:17 AM, Jay K wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 13px; ">The gcc intermediate form does support exception handling.<br>Efficient exception handling doesn't motivate gcc to llvm switch.<br>As well, generating C++ is a good option for this reason.<br> At least on non-NT/Tru64/VMS systems.<br>As well, since this is multiple axes, an initial C backend could generate code<br>like we do today -- pthread_getspecific/setjmp.<br><br>Switching to LLVM is a big task.</span></span></blockquote></div><br><div>As big as making C++ backend?</div><div><br></div><div>I don't see it as a switch. Just as another backend.</div><div><br></div><div>And yes, I know it's easier from audience. It is your call, but anything C, C++, GCC is pain long term. We will probably all reap benefits of that C backend, as good intermediate solution if nothing else, but sooner we settle on LLVM, and forget GCC's wriggling backend, better.</div><div><br></div></body></html>