search for: excal

Mikael Lyngvig wrote: > Hi Duncan, > > I agree on the problem about linking with code - I actually do mention > this in the paper. I propose adding a new calling convention called > "excall". > The problem is that you can't automatically determine from a function declaration whether it comes from "inside" (is exception-aware) or not. This means that you'd have to make the user explicitly declare one of them. This is either a nightmare for using libraries...

Hi Duncan, I agree on the problem about linking with code - I actually do mention this in the paper. I propose adding a new calling convention called "excall". The central point of my paper is that only one parameter is needed as the return value (because of the use of the flag): the EAX register can safely be used for both the exception instance and the return value as these never appear simultaneously. That's the primary reason I use the C...

Hi Mikael, the idea of modifying functions so they return two parameters (the usual one and an exception pointer or some kind of exception flag) is well known. The LLVM vmkit project actually uses a variant of this: rather than returning the exception pointer in a register, it sticks it in a global thread local variable. I only took a quick look at your paper, but it seems to me that it has a

Hi, The guys on the Tiny C mailing list referred me to this list because I suggested adding a simple exception handling mechanism to Tiny C. I have written a small article on a proposal to add try/catch and throw statements to C, knowing very well that this is a non-standard extention, but there are so many of those in the C world that another one shouldn't be a big issue. The Tiny C guys