On 02/11/2015 12:15 PM, Francisco Jerez wrote: > Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> writes: >> [...] >> Indeed. And another thing to consider is that we've discussed >> compiling with -fno-exceptions. >> > > Heh, the benefit you get from doing that is virtually zero. And in > cases like this where failure would have to be handled many levels up in > the stack and require redesigning an interface used in hundreds of > places making it more awkward to use, not using exceptions is a really > strong incentive not to handle failure at all. I cannot see any better > solution here other than throwing an exception or letting the program > segfault.
Except OpenGL is a C API. I don't see how an exception could even get delivered to a C program calling down into our driver through the GL API. Since our driver can be called from the X server, just letting the program segfault is, at best, not cool. If some of our internals are designed so that we can't handle possibly handle a resource allocation failure, that internal is designed wrong. Looking at src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_allocator.h, there are several trivial ways that simple_allocator::allocate could be modified to allow error reporting. >> I think it's okay to add out-of-memory checks where we can reasonably >> do something about them, but code churn *just* to silence a tool (one >> that I'm not aware of catching any meaningful bugs) doesn't seem good. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mesa-dev mailing list >> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
