<html><head><base href="x-msg://1815/"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>I'd like something that allows us to use the existing RTExStack exception tables and does not depend on the compiler back-end to emit exception tables, except for assurances that code will not move around labels that define exception scopes.</div><div><br></div><div>The advantage of this is that we can retain portability to different back-ends, so long as the runtime supports the necessary RTStack routines.</div><div><br><div><div>On Jan 6, 2011, at 10:57 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; "><div class="hmmessage" style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; ">I think _Unwind_RaiseException is the way to go.<br>It is the Linux runtime, the Darwin runtime, the *BSD runtime.<br>There still remains the setjmp option for portability.<br>libunwind is sort of an option, carrying it around, but I think probably not preferred.<br><br> - Jay<br><br><hr id="stopSpelling">From:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:hosking@cs.purdue.edu">hosking@cs.purdue.edu</a><br>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 09:27:03 -0500<br>To:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:jay.krell@cornell.edu">jay.krell@cornell.edu</a><br>CC:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:m3devel@elegosoft.com">m3devel@elegosoft.com</a><br>Subject: Re: [M3devel] how to use gcc exception/unwind support?<br><br>I am just leery of getting too much more entangled with the gcc runtime.<div>It makes our compiler even more non-portable.<br><br><div><div>On Jan 6, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Jay K wrote:</div><br class="ecxApple-interchange-newline"><blockquote><span class="ecxApple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div class="ecxhmmessage" style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; "> >> Yes, indeed. We don't need all the overhead of the C++ exception handling mechanism.<br><br><br> > It is so much? Well, it maybe is more to understand.<br><br><br>There is also a very good chance that raising a Modula-3 exception<br>will run C++ destructors for intervening threads, which is desirable,<br>if we do this "right".<br>Likewise, C++ exceptions running Modula-3 unlock/finally blocks.<br>Interop can be good.<br><br><br> - Jay<br></div></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>