search for: throwns

On 25 November 2010 12:01, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > I see what you are saying now.  Unfortunately optimizations such as > inlining can result in code ending up in cleanup landing pads. This is the part that escapes me... but I haven't spent too much time thinking about inlining EH information yet. > OK :)  Essentially what happens is as follows: when

Hi Renato, >> OK :) Essentially what happens is as follows: when running destructors >> when exiting a scope (which may be a nested scope), if a destructor throws >> an exception then any remaining destructors are first run, then the >> Program_Error exception is thrown at the point of the scope exit. This >> may be caught by an enclosing handler. > >

On Aug 4, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Peter Lawrence wrote: > Bill, > I believe the empty-exception-specification example is a red-herring, > but that if you can construct an example where you think a landing-pad > requires multiple filter lists then I think we can then have a productive > conversation about it. > > I believe we can only get multiple filter lists in a

Dear LLVM Members, The below source code from gcc test suite replicates the problem which i am facing. When it is built with clang, it throws an abort (highlighted). The following are my observations - 1. The object(tmp) is not getting destroyed immediately after the exception is thrown. In case of Clang, the object is getting destroyed at a later point of time. 2. In case of gcc, the

Bill, I believe the empty-exception-specification example is a red- herring, but that if you can construct an example where you think a landing-pad requires multiple filter lists then I think we can then have a productive conversation about it. I believe we can only get multiple filter lists in a landing-pad if we attempt to merge exception-regions, and since filters are only an

Hello, A few days ago I upgraded to the LLVM/clang ToT (on Jan 19th or so) and I just encountered this assertion. “Expected to drop a reference” which is defined in llvm/lib/IR/Metadata.cpp line 136. I create DebugLoc objects using DebugLog:get(unsigned line, unsigned Col, MDNode *Scope, MDNode *InlinedAt=nullptr) The DebugLoc objects are wrapped in one of my classes and when instances get

Hi All, I'm trying to catch an exception that is "passed through" an LLVM ExecutionEngine but I am unable to do so. Specifically, in C++ code, inside a try/catch block, I call a JITted function, which in turn calls back into my code. Everything works fine unless an exception is thrown; I would except the outermost try/catch(...) block to catch the exception thrown in my innermost

Hi Renato, >> I don't understand what you are saying. Cleanups (e.g. destructors) > > Hi Duncan, > > Cleanup landing pads normally call destructors, but they're not a > destructor themselves. I'm simply saying that compiler generated > blocks (such as cleanups) should never depend on user variables. I see what you are saying now. Unfortunately optimizations

On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote: > >> You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would >> seem rather irresponsible... > > > Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old > versions of packages online either AFAIK. >

Hi I am using the flowClust package from BioConductor, which is largely implemented in c. For some of my data, the package occasionally (and quite stochastically) encounters a particular condition which halts its operation. At this point, it calls the error() function defined by Rcpp, and halts. What I would like to be able to do is to catch the error thrown, and retry the operation a few

Bill, ooops, yes, I described the meaning of "throw(A)" backwards, but I still think my example shows why you cannot merge LandingpadInst while inlining because multiple filter-lists on a LandingpadInst don't make sense. Perhaps I'm reading your original spec wrong, perhaps I'm mis-reading Duncan's emails, but I read them to mean that your syntax supports

On 25 November 2010 11:03, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > I don't understand what you are saying.  Cleanups (e.g. destructors) Hi Duncan, Cleanup landing pads normally call destructors, but they're not a destructor themselves. I'm simply saying that compiler generated blocks (such as cleanups) should never depend on user variables. But I get what you're

In article <CAGkb5vexU7eoU=-ASF_uPN_PA68QQi2RU0HdPhozZEYDE0VqEg at mail.gmail.com>, James Hogarth <james.hogarth at gmail.com> wrote: > > This is especially important if you use anything from EPEL as EPEL5 will be > removed when RHEL goes EOL. You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible... Cheers Tony -- Tony

I am going to take a really wild guess and say "Try replacing the outermost quotes with single quotes or escape the double quotes around the numeral 1". Your second example has double quotes within double quotes and I'm wondering if that's getting rendered as "yum --debuglevel=" 1 " install ..." (extra space added for emphasis).

Starting maybe ~ 12 hours ago, the proverbial floodgates were thrown open on emails sent to the CentOS-announce mailing list for CentOS 5.x, all on account of individual package releases. RedHat have not done the same. What's up? Are these mistakenly released re-announcements of (previously released) package updates? Or, did the mailman server have a burp or hiccup? Or, have the CentOS

On Mar 23, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Let's take your example. You will have code that looks like this: > > extern "C" void thunk_item_M_delete( void *v_that ) { > item *that = 0; > try { > that = static_cast<item*>( v_that ); > that->~item(); > } catch (...) { > that->~item(); > } > } No I

> On Feb 8, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I think this behavior is intended to allow better LTO between C and C++. Consider this kind of code: > > // foo.h > extern "C" int doThing(bool canThrow); > // foo.cpp > int doThing(bool canThrow) { > ... > if (hadError) { > if (canThrow)

On Mar 23, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Paul J. Lucas wrote: > On Mar 22, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> On Mar 22, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Paul J. Lucas <paul at lucasmail.org> wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately, I'm not following. How is having the code that catches all exceptions in a separate function different from what I proposed (putting the try/catch in the

Xen patchbot -unstable wrote: > # HG changeset patch > # User emellor@leeni.uk.xensource.com > # Node ID da24df1ea484cf72dc9d367d52e828777e0e20cd > # Parent c1bb4eb565296bdb00aed84fcc877befbcebd8e9 > Improve error handling, in particular fixing the ProtocolError that is thrown > when a domain is specified by the user that does not exist. Added a few > error codes -- many

There was a thread about C7 bash completion back in August last year, but it doesn't have answers for this problem. Example: "yum install /path/to/local/package" works fine with tab completion to fill in the path and package bits. However, "yum --debuglevel="1" install ..." just gets stuck and doesn't offer anything. The only option is to type everything