Bernd Schmidt writes: > Andrew Haley wrote: > > Bernd Schmidt writes: > > > David Daney wrote: > > > > Perhaps not in general, but one unstated premise of this whole thread > > is > > > > that for some GCC targets (most Unix like operating systems) you > > *can* > > > > count on a SIGSEGV when you dereference a null pointer. The java > > front > > > > end takes advantage of this fact to eliminate explicit checks for > > > > dereferencing of null pointers. > > > > > > Oh. > > > > > > Speaking of which, has anyone ported gcj to a MMU-less uClinux platform > > yet? > > > > It's impossible with the current config. This is because some of > > libgcj is written on C++, and the C++ compiler FE does not insert > > checks for null pointer accesses. I wrote a small patch to do this > > but it was rejected. > > Hmm, we can trap null pointer accesses, but I don't think we deliver > reliable SIGSEGV signals yet or provide a means of getting the faulting > address. If that was fixed, is there anything obvious that stands in > the way of a uClinux/uClibc port?
I don't think so. The only other dependency we have is POSIX threads. Andrew.
