Hi Tom!
On Thu, 3 May 2018 11:30:19 +0200, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
On 05/03/2018 10:39 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
On Wed, 2 May 2018 19:36:53 +0200, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
IV.
I'd prefer a robust abort implementation that:
- does not depend on the __builtin_trap gcc bug being fixed, and
Why not just do that? (Even just on trunk, given that the current
implementation as used for release branches will effectively also abort?)
Well, what you're saying here is that a robust implementation is not
needed, given that you think that the current implementation will work
in all the use cases you can think of and think of as relevant.
I OTOH think that with a robust implementation, it will work in all use
cases.
Well, what I don't understand is why your proposed 'abort' implementation
is more robust than a '__builtin_trap' one (with GCC fixed, of course)?