Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "cxa_rethrow".
Did you mean:
__cxa_rethrow
2011 Jul 27
5
[LLVMdev] LLVMdev Digest, Vol 85, Issue 50
...since in the English language it is so ambiguous (resume
normal execution following
the conclusion of handing an exception, verses resume throwing an
exception). IE cosmetics
do matter.
7) there are still lots of other intrinsics/routines involved:
__cxa_allocate_exception
__cxa_throw, cxa_rethrow
__cxa_begin_catch(), __cxa_end_catch
although these particular ones seem to be the easiest to document as
they do seem to be
translated verbatim (no CodeGen miracles).
8) I really like the idea of "terminate" being one of the options to
the landingpad
instruction, it makes ide...
2011 Jul 28
0
[LLVMdev] LLVMdev Digest, Vol 85, Issue 50
...ain, and the new behavior is different than what the 'unwind' instruction. I agree with Chris that a mix of something like "resumeunwind" would make more sense.
> 7) there are still lots of other intrinsics/routines involved:
> __cxa_allocate_exception
> __cxa_throw, cxa_rethrow
> __cxa_begin_catch(), __cxa_end_catch
> although these particular ones seem to be the easiest to document as they do seem to be
> translated verbatim (no CodeGen miracles).
>
It would involve hard-coding language-specific calls and ABIs into LLVM. That's something we try to av...
2011 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] LLVMdev Digest, Vol 85, Issue 50
...hrowing an exception). IE cosmetics
> do matter.
I would be fine with still calling resume "unwind", but the new instruction
does need to carry extra information.
> 7) there are still lots of other intrinsics/routines involved:
> __cxa_allocate_exception
> __cxa_throw, cxa_rethrow
> __cxa_begin_catch(), __cxa_end_catch
> although these particular ones seem to be the easiest to document as they do seem to be
> translated verbatim (no CodeGen miracles).
These are not intrinsics, and it's not our responsibility to document them.
If you're borrowing the Ita...