From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7141 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2010 08:53:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 7132 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Oct 2010 08:53:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 08:53:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9D8roX0021102 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 04:53:50 -0400 Received: from zebedee.pink (ovpn-113-34.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.34]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9D8rn6l007958; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 04:53:49 -0400 Message-ID: <4CB5739C.6030504@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 08:53:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: java@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Centralize knowledge of eh personality routines References: <4CB4E841.1090308@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4CB4E841.1090308@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 On 10/12/2010 11:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > The driver for this patch is SEH, which will add yet another function > name variant in each of these places in each front end. While I could > adjust each language appropriately, it seems to me that it is a bit > cleaner to centralize this knowledge. > > The next possibly objectionable point is including dwarf2.h in tree.h. > I went ahead and did this because in the past we had talked about using > the dwarf language enum in LTO. I could see eliminating the hackish > language_string -> enum mapping that is done in dwarf2out.c as well. > > Comments? Objections? Sounds good. Andrew.