Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "using_sjlj_exceptions".
2007 Dec 12
1
[LLVMdev] Darwin vs exceptions
...00
> +++ gcc-4.2.llvm/gcc/except.c 2007-12-12 20:56:19.000000000 +0100
> @@ -4053,9 +4053,9 @@
> {
> /* The default c++ routines aren't actually c++ specific, so use
> those. */
> /* LLVM local begin */
> - llvm_unwind_resume_libfunc = llvm_init_one_libfunc
> ( USING_SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS ?
> -
> "_Unwind_SjLj_Resume"
> - :
> "_Unwind_Resume");
> + llvm_unwind_resume_libfunc =
> + llvm_init_one_libfunc(USING_SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS ?
>...
2007 Dec 10
3
[LLVMdev] Darwin vs exceptions
On Dec 10, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
>>> ... If you force a "cleanup" by changing the selector call to:
>>> %eh_select8.i = tail call i32 (i8*, i8*, ...)*
>>> @llvm.eh.selector.i32( i8* %eh_ptr.i, i8* bitcast (i32 (...)*
>>> @__gxx_personality_v0 to i8*), i32 0)
>>> then it doesn't work either: the unwinder observes that
2007 Dec 12
0
[LLVMdev] Darwin vs exceptions
Hi Dale,
> No, I don't want to change the semantics of invoke, at least I don't
> think so.
> When inlining, I want the inlined throw to reach cleanup code as it
> does.
> But I want the Unwind_Resume call that ends the cleanup code to be
> replaced with a control transfer to the handler (or cleanup) in the
> calling
> function, i.e. the inliner needs to know