Re: [RFC] Using values to handle unwinding

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 09:29:51PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> I don't mind breaking all the targets if this is the way we want
> to do it. But either way, whether we use a branch or not, I'd like
> us to break the target by breaking the build. This way, managing to
> build again means we're done with the conversion.
> 
> If I understand the patch correctly, this is going to be the case,
> right? You're removing some old routines, and replacing with a
> new one that has a different name.

The version I posted would leave other targets working, so they could
be switched one at a time.  Not the best way to handle a transition,
but it saved me having to convert the other non-dwarf unwinders in
the build I was testing.

If we're going to make a switch I think changing the signature of
unwind->prev_register would be best; that will stop other targets
from compiling (and remove some of the ugly bits of the patch,
too).

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery