search for: nnullpointerexception

...or example) can also be removed. The idea of the optimizer computing that a trap can't happen is obviously desirable, but how does the front end tell the optimizer how to figure that out? I.e., consider this java: void foo(SomeClass x) { x.field1 = 123; x.field2 = 456; // no nNullPointerException possible here } Clearly an exception can happen with the first statement -- iff x is null. But no exception is possible on the second statement. But how does the optimizer "know" this without being Java specific? It seems like LLVM will have to have some built-in notion of a "nul...

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Archie Cobbs wrote: > Related idea.. what if all instructions (not just "invoke") could be > allowed to have an optional "except label ..."? This is the direction that we plan to go, when someone is interested enough to implement it. There are some rough high-level notes about this idea here:

...> The idea of the optimizer computing that a trap can't happen is obviously > desirable, but how does the front end tell the optimizer how to figure > that out? I.e., consider this java: > > void foo(SomeClass x) { > x.field1 = 123; > x.field2 = 456; // no nNullPointerException possible here > } > > Clearly an exception can happen with the first statement -- iff x is null. > But no exception is possible on the second statement. But how does the > optimizer "know" this without being Java specific? It seems like LLVM > will have to have some b...