similar to: [LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?

On 11-06-12 12:01 AM, Sohail Somani wrote: > Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Summary: Need new LLVM instructions or extending of all instructions. > > C++ exceptions are synchronous: the compiler knows when/where they are > being raised. > > Asynchronous exceptions can

On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Sohail, > >> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? > > not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke > instruction and attach exception handling information to basic blocks. See > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExceptionHandlingChanges.txt > for a

On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > >> Hi Sohail, >> >>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >> >> not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke >> instruction and attach exception handling information to basic blocks. See

Hi Sohail, > Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke instruction and attach exception handling information to basic blocks. See http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExceptionHandlingChanges.txt for a discussion. Ciao, Duncan.

On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> >>> Hi Sohail, >>> >>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >>> >>> not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the

On 11-06-12 7:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > >> > On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> > >>> >> Hi Sohail, >>> >> >>>> >>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >>> >> >>> >> not currently. The

On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >> >>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Sohail, >>>> >>>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?

On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Sohail Somani wrote: > On 11-06-12 7:40 PM, John McCall wrote: >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >> >>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Hi Sohail, >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous

On 2011-06-12, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> >>> Hi Sohail, >>> >>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >>> >>> not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke

On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com> wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > >> Hi Sohail, >> >>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >> >> not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke >> instruction and attach exception handling

On Jun 13, 2011, at 2:23 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote: >> >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> >>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: >>> >>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM,

On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: >> >>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >>> >>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Sohail, >>>>>

On 11-06-12 8:53 PM, John McCall wrote: >> > The CFG point is a valid point. In what I've read on the topic so far >> > (yay Internet), it seems like the CFG would have to represent the fact >> > that control can jump to a handler after nearly every instruction in the >> > presence of async exceptions. The Hotspot compiler probably does this. >> >

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote: > On Jun 13, 2011, at 2:23 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > > On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > > On Jun 12,

On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:53 PM, John McCall wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Sohail Somani wrote: > >> On 11-06-12 7:40 PM, John McCall wrote: >>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >>> >>>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Sohail,

On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote: > Let me make an analogy. We live in Germany. Sohail wants to drive to Spain. Duncan told him to go through France. You and Cameron are saying that the traffic in France is awful, and some friends who went to Italy didn't go through France. I am trying to point out that Italy is not Spain, even though they are both on the Mediterranean,

Moving this month old RFC to llvmdev. Not sure why I sent this to cfe-dev in the first place... --- Based on code review discussion from John, he thinks filter expressions should be emitted into the body of the function with the try, rather than being outlined by the frontend. Instead of having the frontend create filter functions, we would use labels in place of typeinfo. The IR would look

Hi Reid, I’ve been following your proposal, and I’d be interested in helping out if I can. My main interest right now is in enabling C++ exception handling in clang for native (i.e. not mingw/cygwin) Windows targets (both 32-bit and 64-bit), but if I understand things correctly that will be closely related to your SEH work under the hood. I’m still trying to get up to speed on what is and is

I was wondering if the upcoming LLVM 3.5 release will have support for Microsoft Windows Structured Exception handling (e.g., __try/__except/__finally)? Thanks, Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140730/e3d18989/attachment.html>

On Jun 13, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote: >> Let me make an analogy. We live in Germany. Sohail wants to drive to Spain. Duncan told him to go through France. You and Cameron are saying that the traffic in France is awful, and some friends who went to Italy didn't go through France. I am trying to point out that