Rolf Magnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, this is with sjlj exception handling. I now managed to compile > it with the newer exception handling method, and (at least I think > that was the reason) the executable size got reduced to 11k for both > the exception test and the new/delete test.
Great! > Still haven't tried if it actually works. I guess now it's time to > activate my atmega128 board that I bought a while ago. Yes, a large CPU is probably convenient when it comes to that kind of experiments. Hopefully, you've also got external SRAM on board, that way you don't have to care for too many debugging strings and such. >> Agreed. That's been my opinion as well some 5 years ago. OTOH, if >> exceptions were at least possible (without being enabled by >> default), > Well, if their code is really only pulled in when they are used, > they could even be enabled by default. Agreed. I'm happy that you're making progress with that! If you feel you need to get CVS access for the avr-libc project, just tell us -- even if it's ``only'' for maintaining documentation. Right now, there's a single and about 5 years old FAQ entry about C++, which might quickly become stale if you continue making progress. If you agree, maybe the best idea would be to start a C++ FAQ instead of that single entry, or maybe we should split the existing FAQ into three or four different sub-FAQs per topic, and C++ will become one of them. Unfortunately, getting changes into GCC might be a bit harder. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
