This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: cleanup handlers and longjmp
- To: kaz at ashi dot footprints dot net
- Subject: Re: cleanup handlers and longjmp
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 09:31:08 +0100
- CC: velco at fadata dot bg, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012111858460.21985-100000@ashi.FootPrints.net>
> That's not to say that it would not be nice to have longjmp, cleanup
> handlers and C++ exception handling all play together nicely, for
> writing programs that are specific to GNU/Linux.
Currently, Posix is silent on the issue of C++ in general, and
exceptions in particular. Likewise, C++ is silent on the issue of
threads.
It is likely that vendors that offer to combine both also attempt to
offer "proper" unwinding of C++ exceptions in a thread, in the long
run. So I expect that future revisions of the relevant standards are
more specific on the issue of exceptions and threads.
> No, some extensions are based on syntax errors and diagnosable
> constraint violations. E.g. gcc's support for zero length arrays,
> nested functions, or labels without a statement.
Oops, you're right.
Regards,
Martin