[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[pinskia@physics.uc.edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606


pinskia@physics.uc.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2003-05-26 05:03:28
               date|                            |


------- Additional Comments From pinskia@physics.uc.edu  2003-05-26 05:03 -------
still happens on the mainline (20030525).



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[pcarlini at suse dot de]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   |dot org                     |
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From rth at redhat dot com  2004-02-08 03:49 -------
Subject: Re:  uncaught_exception() returns false too early

Jason, is the analysis in this PR correct?  If so, I guess the IA-64 EH
ABI isn't good enough.  We'd need to add a new entry point to be used
with catch types with non-trivial constructors.  Something like: 

	struct S s;
	T.1 = __cxa_begin_catch_part1 (<<eh object>>);
	try
	  {
	    try
	      {
	        __comp_ctor (&s, T.1)
	      }
	    catch
	      {
	        terminate ();
	      }
	    __cxa_begin_catch_part2 (<<eh object>>);
	    try
	      {
	        // handler
	      }
	    finally
	      {
	        __comp_dtor (&s);
	      }
	  }
	finally
	  {
	    __cxa_end_catch ();
	  }


r~


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[jason at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com  2004-02-09 20:40 -------
Subject: Re:  uncaught_exception() returns false too
 early

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 19:49:45 -0800, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:

> Jason, is the analysis in this PR correct?

Looks like.  And we also aren't incrementing uncaught_exception soon enough
on a rethrow; we should do it in cxa_rethrow instead of cxa_end_catch.

> If so, I guess the IA-64 EH ABI isn't good enough.  We'd need to add a
> new entry point to be used with catch types with non-trivial
> constructors.

Makes sense.

Jason


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[pcarlini at suse dot de]

------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de  2004-02-09 21:10 -------
>       And we also aren't incrementing uncaught_exception soon enough
> on a rethrow; we should do it in cxa_rethrow instead of cxa_end_catch.

Oh, really?!?
If I understand well what you are saying, in my tree I had a trivial tentative
fix for 14026 (mentioned on IRC ;) which did exactly that! Then Richard fixed it
in the other way (not decreasing the counter in cxa_begin_catch, basically)

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From rth at redhat dot com  2004-02-09 21:14 -------
Subject: Re:  uncaught_exception() returns false too early

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 09:10:43PM -0000, pcarlini at suse dot de wrote:
> If I understand well what you are saying, in my tree I had a trivial
> tentative fix for 14026 (mentioned on IRC ;) which did exactly that!
> Then Richard fixed it in the other way (not decreasing the counter
> in cxa_begin_catch, basically)

I had interpreted that situation differently, since the exception is
still caught at a different nesting level.  Perhaps I'm wrong.


r~


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[bangerth at dealii dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org  2004-09-13 16:56 -------
Some discussion here: 
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg00731.html 

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|4.0                         |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-11-03 00:20 -------

Yo RTH, any word on this?

-benjamin

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[sebor at roguewave dot com]

------- Additional Comments From sebor at roguewave dot com  2004-11-03 00:49 -------
FWIW, if you missed it there was a discussion of this issue
on c++std-core@accu.org, starting with c++std-core-10643. Mike
Miller said he'd open an issue for it. I don't see it on the
list yet but I assume it will be in in the post-Redmond mailing.
AFAIK, he plans to push for the EDG behavior (but not that of
Intel C++). If it's accepted the output of the original test
case would be required to be (note that the value is already
true in the copy ctor):

S::S() [0]: uncaught_exception() = 0
t.cpp(32): throw: uncaught_exception() = 0
S::S(const S& [0]) [1]: uncaught_exception() = 1
S::~S() [0]: uncaught_exception() = 1
S::S(const S& [1]) [2]: uncaught_exception() = 1
t.cpp(36): catch: uncaught_exception() = 0
S::~S() [2]: uncaught_exception() = 1
S::S(const S& [1]) [3]: uncaught_exception() = 1
t.cpp(42): catch: uncaught_exception() = 0
S::~S() [3]: uncaught_exception() = 0
S::~S() [1]: uncaught_exception() = 0

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2004-11-03 14:47 -------
If the issue is still under the C++ committee, this bug should be suspended. 
Unless there is something which is *surely* wrong with C++ and that can be 
fixed meanwhile.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[giovannibajo at libero dot it]

------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2004-11-03 14:48 -------
(In reply to comment #10)

> If the issue is still under the C++ committee, this bug should be suspended. 
> Unless there is something which is *surely* wrong with C++ and that can be 
> fixed meanwhile.

I meant "wrong with G++" of course.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[sebor at roguewave dot com]

------- Additional Comments From sebor at roguewave dot com  2004-11-03 16:42 -------
(In reply to comment #10)

I think it's clear that gcc is wrong in not returning true in the initializer
of the exception object in the catch handler (the second invocation of the copy
ctor in the test case). What's not so clear cut is whether it should also do so
during the creation of the temporary exception object (the first invocation of
the copy ctor).

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-03 23:20 -------
I'm not actively working on this, or planning to in the near future.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
                   |                            |dot org
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   |dot org                     |
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[david dot moore at intel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From david dot moore at intel dot com  2005-02-18 17:56 -------
As the person who has been working on similar problems in the Intel Compiler, 
Martin and I had some lengthy discussions about this during which he convinced 
me he was correct.

The result was issue 475 in the active C++ core issues list. Its now clear that 
uncaught_exception should be on during the copy construction of temporary that 
is thrown. 

Thinking about the user model, it seems that this is the only model that makes 
sense.  I believe the standard clarifications in this issue will be made but 
that in any case, the issue is clear enough at this point to proceed.

M2CW. David Moore


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |david dot moore at intel dot
                   |                            |com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-19 02:35 -------
Subject: Bug 10606

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	rth@gcc.gnu.org	2005-02-19 02:35:25

Modified files:
	gcc/cp         : ChangeLog except.c 
	libstdc++-v3   : ChangeLog 
	libstdc++-v3/config: linker-map.gnu 
	libstdc++-v3/libsupc++: eh_alloc.cc eh_catch.cc eh_throw.cc 
	                        unwind-cxx.h 
Added files:
	gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/eh: uncaught1.C 

Log message:
	PR libstdc++/10606
	gcc/cp/
	* except.c (do_get_exception_ptr): New.
	(expand_start_catch_block): Use it.
	libstdc++/
	* config/linker-map.gnu (CXXABI_1.3.1): Add __cxa_get_exception_ptr.
	* libsupc++/eh_alloc.cc (__cxa_allocate_exception): Increment
	uncaughtExceptions here instead of ...
	* libsupc++/eh_throw.cc (__cxa_throw) ... here.
	(__cxa_rethrow): Increment uncaughtExceptions here instead of ...
	* libsupc++/eh_catch.cc (__cxa_end_catch): ... here.
	(__cxa_get_exception_ptr): New.
	* libsupc++/unwind-cxx.h (__cxa_get_exception_ptr): Declare.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4637&r2=1.4638
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/except.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.180&r2=1.181
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/eh/uncaught1.C.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.2901&r2=1.2902
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/config/linker-map.gnu.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.77&r2=1.78
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_alloc.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_catch.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.8&r2=1.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_throw.cc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.8&r2=1.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/unwind-cxx.h.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.7&r2=1.8



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-19 02:38 -------
Fixed.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[pcarlini at suse dot de]

------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de  2005-02-22 11:24 -------
Richard, your fix is causing the regression of libstdc++/14026, can you please
have a look again to both?!? Thanks in advance...

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-22 14:00 -------
(In reply to comment #17)
> Richard, your fix is causing the regression of libstdc++/14026, can you please
> have a look again to both?!? Thanks in advance...

PR 20091 was opened for this regression.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-22 23:19 -------
Fixed.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-24 20:49 -------

I'd like to add a testcase for this, based on the mailing list commentary here:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-01/msg00035.html

Although I suppse the 475 wording would also be sufficient.

Thoughts? I think this is tricky enough that unless something is added to test
for this, future changes risk unitentional breakage.

-benjamin

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[rth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-24 21:19 -------
You mean different from gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/eh/uncaught1.C?

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606

[Bug libstdc++/10606] uncaught_exception() returns false too early

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-04-21 00:28 -------
Subject: Bug 10606

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Branch: 	apple-local-200502-branch
Changes by:	dpatel@gcc.gnu.org	2005-04-21 00:28:36

Modified files:
	gcc/cp         : ChangeLog.apple-ppc except.c 

Log message:
	Radar 4093536
	Undo PR libstdc++/10606 fix.
	2005-02-18  Richard Henderson  <rth@redhat.com>
	
	PR libstdc++/10606
	* except.c (do_get_exception_ptr): New.
	(expand_start_catch_block): Use it.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.apple-ppc.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=apple-local-200502-branch&r1=1.1.4.5&r2=1.1.4.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/except.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=apple-local-200502-branch&r1=1.180.2.1&r2=1.180.2.2



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10606