From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Horst von Brand To: meissner@cygnus.com Cc: egcs@cygnus.com, rth@cygnus.com Subject: Re: exception handling poll Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:08:00 -0000 Message-id: <199710171328.KAA10278@pincoya.inf.utfsm.cl> References: <199710162023.QAA29778@tweedledumb.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1997-10/msg00704.html meissner@cygnus.com said: > [Sorry, attribution lost]: > | A little poll for those that have been complaining about > | exception handling frame unwind info being included for C: > | Assuming the .eh_frame section is completely read-only, at what > | eh/text ratio would you find it acceptible that that information > | is always there? > | Can you live with 10%? 8? 5? 3? > For many embedded users, the answer is 0. Seconded. And for other applications too. Disk space is _not_ infinite either. Also remember C is mostly used as portable assembly, with the intention of "no fat whatsoever". Sadly, C++ is wandering off into PL/I land... BTW, as has been said several times before: You _can't_ ever trow through C code, unless that C code is _very_ *very* carefully written (I'd suspect C++ must be written with the same care, or thereabouts, as far as things stand now ;-). So C++ exception handling support in C is not only a waste (can't be used in C) but even extremely dangerous. Just leave that stuff to C++, and compile your "C" to be used with C++ with a C++ compiler, or add it in with an explicit enabling flag for C, so clueless people don't try to do it by mistake. If libc or whatever functions need overriding for C++ with C++-safe versions, do that in libc++ or whatever. You'll have to do that anyway, as you will never be able to trust the native libraries. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513