On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> it is ok ?
Two minor changes, fine to commit with those.
1. Full stop at the end of the sentence.
2. Avoid extra ... pair, rather add this to the existing.
Thanks,
Gerald
Gerald,
it is ok ?
Tristan.
On Jul 19, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>
> On Jul 19, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>
>> On 07/19/2012 08:30 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>>
>>> No regression on i386 GNU/Linux.
>>> Committed.
>>
>> Nice. Is this NEWS / docs --or wherever rel
On Jul 19, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> I did a manual build and testing for x86_64-pc-mingw32 and I will run a
>> full bootstrap and regression run on GNU/Linux.
>>
>> Tristan.
>>
>> libstdc++-v3/
>> * libsupc++/eh_personality.cc (__gxx_personality_seh0): New function.
>>
> I did a manual build and testing for x86_64-pc-mingw32 and I will run a
> full bootstrap and regression run on GNU/Linux.
>
> Tristan.
>
> libstdc++-v3/
> * libsupc++/eh_personality.cc (__gxx_personality_seh0): New function.
> Adjust for SEH.
> * config/abi/pre/gnu.ver: Add __
On 07/19/2012 11:15 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> To clarify, GCC emits SEH unwind info since 4.7, so I propose slightly
> modified words:
Looks good to me. Thanks!
--
Pedro Alves
On Jul 19, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 07/19/2012 08:30 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>
>> No regression on i386 GNU/Linux.
>> Committed.
>
> Nice. Is this NEWS / docs --or wherever release notes are written-- worthy?
>
> Something like this, borrowed from your own words:
>
> On
On 07/19/2012 08:30 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> No regression on i386 GNU/Linux.
> Committed.
Nice. Is this NEWS / docs --or wherever release notes are written-- worthy?
Something like this, borrowed from your own words:
On Win64, the compiler now emits SEH unwind info. GCC exceptions now p
On Jul 17, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2012/7/17 Richard Henderson :
>> On 07/17/2012 12:35 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>>> So, the first element of ExceptionInformation will be exc.
>>>
>>> Should I add a comment ?
>>
>> Ah right. Definitely.
>>
>> Otherwise I don't see anything else
2012/7/17 Richard Henderson :
> On 07/17/2012 12:35 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> So, the first element of ExceptionInformation will be exc.
>>
>> Should I add a comment ?
>
> Ah right. Definitely.
>
> Otherwise I don't see anything else in the way. Kai?
>
>
> r~
No, I don't have any objections.
On 07/17/2012 12:35 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> So, the first element of ExceptionInformation will be exc.
>
> Should I add a comment ?
Ah right. Definitely.
Otherwise I don't see anything else in the way. Kai?
r~
On Jul 16, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/13/2012 07:13 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> +_Unwind_RaiseException (struct _Unwind_Exception *exc)
>> +{
>> + memset (exc->private_, 0, sizeof (exc->private_));
>> +
>> + RaiseException (STATUS_GCC_THROW, 0, 1, (ULONG_PTR *)&exc);
>
On 07/13/2012 07:13 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> +_Unwind_RaiseException (struct _Unwind_Exception *exc)
> +{
> + memset (exc->private_, 0, sizeof (exc->private_));
> +
> + RaiseException (STATUS_GCC_THROW, 0, 1, (ULONG_PTR *)&exc);
We almost certainly didn't want pointer-to-pointer...
r~
Hi,
this is a rebase of RTH's patch posted a few years ago. It is almost
unchanged, except that there is no SEH specific unwind.h header (there are 3
#if/#endif part in unwind-generic.h) and a minor cleanup in unwind-seh.c
(indentation, unused variables).
This patch allows to propagate GCC ex
13 matches
Mail list logo
