From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28117 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2009 16:50:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 28109 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jun 2009 16:50:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:50:50 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5AGoQ0K006276; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:50:26 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5AGoPk2023896; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:50:25 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-13-36.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.13.36]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5AGoOEd001075; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:50:24 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 765D6486A3; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:50:18 -0600 (MDT) To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: next/finish/etc -vs- exceptions References: <20090610161204.GB25703@adacore.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:50:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090610161204.GB25703@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Wed\, 10 Jun 2009 12\:12\:04 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00263.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> I can't seem to find the time to look at this in more details while Joel> I'm at the summit, but I always find myself wondering whether it might Joel> have been possible to use the breakpoint_ops structure rather than Joel> introducing a couple of breakpoint kinds... I glanced quickly at the Joel> patch, and I don't think this is the case in this particular instance, Joel> but did you also look at this option, eventually ruling it out? Actually I just looked at the longjmp code and did something very similar. I will take a look at doing this. It would be nice if we had a flag day and simply converted everything to breakpoint_ops. That's usually the best way to ensure that new code is written the "right" way (gcc has also had some bad experiences with these incomplete transitions). Also, I recently realized that the patch computes the CFA incorrectly. Really it ought to always compute the Dwarf CFA. I didn't see a nice way to do that; if you have any suggestions... Joel> The feature itself is really interesting, and I wonder if there might Joel> be something we can do for Ada as well. As far as I know, there is no Joel> hook just yet, but maybe we can have it added as well. After all, I know Joel> a few people who work on the Ada compiler ;-). I was under the impression that Ada used longjmp to implement exceptions, and so the existing longjmp support should work. (Modulo the odd bug or two -- I'm not sure if Pedro's fix for the glibc pointer mangling went in or not.) Tom