search for: bazcleanup

...how I pictured, glad I got it right... ;) > So the above code would look something like this: > > entry: >  invoke @f.run() to %bb unwind to %FooCleanup region(1) > bb: >  invoke @b.run() to %bb2 unwind to %BarCleanup region(1) > bb2: >  invoke @z.run() to %bb3 unwind to %BazCleanup region(1) > ... > BazCleanup: >  ; do stuff >  br %BarCleanup > BarCleanup: >  ; do stuff >  br %FooCleanup > FooCleanup: >  ; do stuff >  br %Dispatch > Dispatch: >  dispatch region(1) resume %block >    catches [ ... ] > > and so on. I see. The front-...

...how all of this information will be used to generate the correct tables, etc.) So the above code would look something like this: entry: invoke @f.run() to %bb unwind to %FooCleanup region(1) bb: invoke @b.run() to %bb2 unwind to %BarCleanup region(1) bb2: invoke @z.run() to %bb3 unwind to %BazCleanup region(1) ... BazCleanup: ; do stuff br %BarCleanup BarCleanup: ; do stuff br %FooCleanup FooCleanup: ; do stuff br %Dispatch Dispatch: dispatch region(1) resume %block catches [ ... ] and so on. If we remove the invoke instructions, the "unwind to" information then go...

...lin wrote: >> So the above code would look something like this: >> >> entry: >> invoke @f.run() to %bb unwind to %FooCleanup region(1) >> bb: >> invoke @b.run() to %bb2 unwind to %BarCleanup region(1) >> bb2: >> invoke @z.run() to %bb3 unwind to %BazCleanup region(1) >> ... >> BazCleanup: >> ; do stuff >> br %BarCleanup >> BarCleanup: >> ; do stuff >> br %FooCleanup >> FooCleanup: >> ; do stuff >> br %Dispatch >> Dispatch: >> dispatch region(1) resume %block >> cat...

Hi Bill, First, I like the idea of being more expressive in IR, since the old exception handling style didn't quite express exception handling, but alternate paths (resume/unwind). That made DwarfException.cpp a big hack. ;) It also makes the front-end engineer's life a lot easier, since there is less need to keep a long list of global state for all current landing pads, clean up areas,

Hi everyone! I've been silently working on the previous exception handling proposal I published last year (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-November/027311.html). However, there were some major deficiencies in it. After discussing this further with Jim Grosbach and John McCall, we've come up with another proposal. As you can see, it incorporates the idea of