X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4F29470B.7010109@cs.utoronto.ca>
Date:	Wed, 01 Feb 2012 09:07:07 -0500
From:	Ryan Johnson <ryan DOT johnson AT cs DOT utoronto DOT ca>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: llvm/clang 3.0-1 silently ignores C++ exception handling
References:	<4F2835F0 DOT 5050704 AT t-online DOT de> <1328068369 DOT 5448 DOT 6 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04> <4F28D9ED DOT 7040703 AT t-online DOT de>
In-Reply-To:	<4F28D9ED.7040703@t-online.de>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 01/02/2012 1:21 AM, Christian Franke wrote:
> Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 19:41 +0100, Christian Franke wrote:
>>> Clang++ 3.0-1 does not produce any exception handling code. Unwind
>>> tables and code within catch(.) {...} blocks are not generated. Throw
>>> always abort()s program.
>>>
>>> Is this as excepted?
>> As best as I can tell, this is an upstream limitation.  Please feel free
>> to take it upstream.
>>
>>
>
> OK, I'll do.
>
> Must be at least somewhat Cygwin specific. Clang on i686 Linux 
> generates exception handling code properly (tested with clang 2.9 on 
> Debian).
I have vague memories that Clang doesn't support SJLJ exceptions, and 
further vague memories that Cygwin favors SJLJ because dwarf exceptions 
interact badly with The Windows Way of doing things. That could be your 
problem, assuming my vague memories aren't completely out of date.

Either way, tho, it's a bit strange that the compiler doesn't squawk at 
you. Clang prides itself on having good diagnostics, and it's not 
exactly a small semantic change to silently replace throw with abort().

Ryan


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -