search for: catches

I have been playing with the cookbook type of tutorials building a fish tournament scoring piece and am having a bit of a problem with a DB field called "points" in my "catch" table that is not input by the user but is calulated based on a "size" field that is input by the user. I have the following in my catch_controller.db def new @catch = Catch.new @fish =

...Linux type information in these examples, but the final implementation will need to use Microsoft-style RTTI. I believe clang already has support for that. The 'simple.ll' example shows a function with a single catch-all handler. The 'catch-type.ll' example shows a function which catches a specific type of exception. The 'min-unwind.ll' example shows a function which has no exception handlers but which requires an unwind handler. The 'nested.ll' example shows a function which has nested try blocks. The nested example illustrates the challenge mentioned above with...

I'm looking at the docs, and while it refers to a "catch-all" clause, it doesn't describe how to construct one. In the old scheme, a selector value of 0 was used. What's the corresponding technique for the new scheme? Do I need to update my personality function to handle catch-alls (it wasn't needed in the previous scheme)? -- -- Talin -------------- next part

..."catch-all" since that section is inaccurate. it doesn't > describe how to construct one. There is in general no such thing as a catch-all: it depends on the personality function (i.e. the language), and, for example, the Ada language doesn't have one (it has something that catches all Ada exceptions, but it won't catch C++ exceptions). In the old scheme, a selector value of 0 was > used. Technically speaking that's a cleanup not a catch-all. C++ illustrates the difference: if you throw an exception in a C++ program that only has cleanups then the exception wo...

...ative proposal to Bill's. It is closer to what we already have (which can be seen as a good or a bad thing!), and is also closer to what gcc does. It is more incremental than Bill's and introduces fewer new concepts. Executive summary ----------------- Remove the personality and list of catches out of eh.selector and stick them directly on invoke instructions. The invoke instruction ---------------------- The invoke instruction is modified by adding extra catch info to it: <result> = invoke <function>(<function args>) to label <normal label> unwind label...

Hi Chris, >>> Is it intended that "cleanup ty_1, ty_2" potentially be different to >>> "cleanup ty_1 cleanup ty_2"? Perhaps this is useful for funky personality >>> functions. >>> >> Yeah. One can basically interleave the catches and filters. But having two catch or two filter clauses in a row should be semantically the same as the clauses being merged into one. (E.g., your examples would be equivalent.) > > Let me rephrase the question then. Why not make the grammar be either: > >>>> <clause>...

On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Executive summary > ----------------- > > Remove the personality and list of catches out of eh.selector and stick them > directly on invoke instructions. > > The invoke instruction > ---------------------- > > The invoke instruction is modified by adding extra catch info to it: > > <result> = invoke <function>(<function args>) >...

Dear R-devel community, There appears to be an inconsistency in R C API about the exceptions that can be raised from C code. Mapping of R C funs to corresponding R functions is as follows. error -> stop warning -> warning REprintf -> message Rprintf -> cat Rprint/cat is of course not an exception, I listed it just for completeness. The inconsistency I would like to report is

...te: >>>> Is it intended that "cleanup ty_1, ty_2" potentially be different to >>>> "cleanup ty_1 cleanup ty_2"? Perhaps this is useful for funky personality >>>> functions. >>>> >>> Yeah. One can basically interleave the catches and filters. But having two catch or two filter clauses in a row should be semantically the same as the clauses being merged into one. (E.g., your examples would be equivalent.) >> >> Let me rephrase the question then. Why not make the grammar be either: >> >>>>>...

...Linux type information in these examples, but the final implementation will need to use Microsoft-style RTTI. I believe clang already has support for that. The 'simple.ll' example shows a function with a single catch-all handler. The 'catch-type.ll' example shows a function which catches a specific type of exception. The 'min-unwind.ll' example shows a function which has no exception handlers but which requires an unwind handler. The 'nested.ll' example shows a function which has nested try blocks. The nested example illustrates the challenge mentioned above with...

Hi all, I have a question regarding subsetting of large data frames. I have two data frames ?catches? and ?tows? and they both have the same 30 variables (columns). I would like to select rows in the data frame ?tows? where all 5 specific variables are NOT matched in ?catches. That is to say, the combination of these 5 variables is unique. One or more of the variables could be the same but the com...

On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:12 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 1 December 2010 07:04, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: >> The unwind edge from an invoke instruction jumps to a landing pad. That landing pad contains code which performs optional cleanups, and then determines which catch handler to call (if any). If no catch handlers are applicable, the exception resumes propagation

Hi Reid, I've been working on the outlining code and have a prototype that produces what I want for a simple case. Now I'm thinking about the heuristics for recognizing the various logical pieces for C++ exception handling code and removing them once they’ve been cloned. I've been working from various comments you've made earlier in this thread, and I'd like to run something

On 1 December 2010 09:46, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Nor these. Basically, I want the basic block that's labeled a "landing pad" to be jumped to by only a dispatch resume or unwind edge of invoke. We could do this with the c.dtor and ch.int here, but it would mean inserting useless "cleanup dispatches" that only resume to the block (see

I am new to the landingpad (which is relatively new too). Documentation http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#i_landingpad leaves some questions open: 1. What happens when actual exception type isn't listed in catch or filter clauses? Does it still return the corresponding structure like if it was listed? Or behavior is undefined? 2. What is 'somety'? Shouldn't it maybe say

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

...ow correct. Please check. :) > it doesn't >> describe how to construct one. > > There is in general no such thing as a catch-all: it depends on the personality > function (i.e. the language), and, for example, the Ada language doesn't have > one (it has something that catches all Ada exceptions, but it won't catch C++ > exceptions). > This is true in a sense that a catch-all is encoded the same way as any other catch type. So for C++, you would specify a catch-all like this: %exn = landingpad { i8*, i32 } personality i32 (...)* __gxx_personality_v0...

Thank you Luke for prompt reply. Is it possible then to request a new function to R C API "message" that would equivalent to R "message" function? Similarly as we now have C "warning" and C "error" functions. Best, Jan On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 5:25 PM Tierney, Luke <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Sep 2019, Jan Gorecki wrote:

Gordon Henriksen wrote: > What blocks would a phi node in %catch require for a case like this? > > define i8 @f(i1 %b) { > > entry: > > b label %try > > try: unwinds to %catch > > b i1 %b, label %then, label %else > > then: unwinds to %catch > > ret void > > else: unwinds to %catch > > ret

...xcept the invoke. If it was needed arbitrarily far downstream then of course my proposal would be dead. But it isn't! Got an example where it is? > Example, if you have this: > > invoke void @foo() > to label %invcont unwind label %lpad > personality @__gxx_personality_v0 > catches %struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi, > %struct.__pointer_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIPKc > > lpad: > call void @bar(%A* %a) ; a cleanup > br label %ppad > > ppad: > %eh_ptr = call i8* llvm.eh.exception() > %eh_sel = call i32 llvm.eh.selector() > ; code to clean u...