| 1 | \chapter{Features}
|
|---|
| 2 |
|
|---|
| 3 | This chapter covers the design and user interface of the \CFA exception
|
|---|
| 4 | handling mechanism.
|
|---|
| 5 |
|
|---|
| 6 | \section{Virtual Casts}
|
|---|
| 7 |
|
|---|
| 8 | Virtual casts and virtual types are not truly part of the exception system but
|
|---|
| 9 | they did not exist in \CFA and are useful in exceptions. So a minimal version
|
|---|
| 10 | of they virtual system was designed and implemented.
|
|---|
| 11 |
|
|---|
| 12 | Virtual types are organized in simple hierarchies. Each virtual type may have
|
|---|
| 13 | a parent and can have any number of children. A type's descendants are its
|
|---|
| 14 | children and its children's descendants. A type may not be its own descendant.
|
|---|
| 15 |
|
|---|
| 16 | Each virtual type has an associated virtual table type. A virtual table is a
|
|---|
| 17 | structure that has fields for all the virtual members of a type. A virtual
|
|---|
| 18 | type has all the virtual members of its parent and can add more. It may also
|
|---|
| 19 | update the values of the virtual members and should in many cases.
|
|---|
| 20 |
|
|---|
| 21 | Except for virtual casts, this is only used internally in the exception
|
|---|
| 22 | system. There is no general purpose interface for the other features. A
|
|---|
| 23 | a virtual cast has the following syntax:
|
|---|
| 24 |
|
|---|
| 25 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 26 | (virtual TYPE)EXPRESSION
|
|---|
| 27 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 28 |
|
|---|
| 29 | This has the same precedence as a traditional C-cast and can be used in the
|
|---|
| 30 | same places. This will convert the result of EXPRESSION to the type TYPE. Both
|
|---|
| 31 | the type of EXPRESSION and TYPE must be pointers to virtual types.
|
|---|
| 32 |
|
|---|
| 33 | The cast is checked and will either return the original value or null, based
|
|---|
| 34 | on the result of the check. The check is does the object pointed at have a
|
|---|
| 35 | type that is a descendant of the target type. If it is the result is the
|
|---|
| 36 | pointer, otherwise the result is null.
|
|---|
| 37 |
|
|---|
| 38 | \section{Exceptions}
|
|---|
| 39 | % Leaving until later, hopefully it can talk about actual syntax instead
|
|---|
| 40 | % of my many strange macros. Syntax aside I will also have to talk about the
|
|---|
| 41 | % features all exceptions support.
|
|---|
| 42 |
|
|---|
| 43 | \subsection{Exception Traits}
|
|---|
| 44 | Exceptions are defined by the trait system; there are a series of traits and
|
|---|
| 45 | if a type satisfies them then they can be used as exceptions.
|
|---|
| 46 |
|
|---|
| 47 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 48 | trait is_exception(dtype exceptT, dtype virtualT) {
|
|---|
| 49 | virtualT const & get_exception_vtable(exceptT *);
|
|---|
| 50 | };
|
|---|
| 51 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 52 | This is the base trait that all exceptions need to match.
|
|---|
| 53 | The single function takes any pointer (including the null pointer) and
|
|---|
| 54 | returns a reference to the virtual table instance. Defining this function
|
|---|
| 55 | also establishes the virtual type and virtual table pair to the resolver
|
|---|
| 56 | and promises that \codeCFA{exceptT} is a virtual type and a child of the
|
|---|
| 57 | base exception type.
|
|---|
| 58 |
|
|---|
| 59 | One odd thing about \codeCFA{get_exception_vtable} is that it should always
|
|---|
| 60 | be a constant function, returning the same value regardless of its argument.
|
|---|
| 61 | A pointer or reference to the virtual table instance could be used instead,
|
|---|
| 62 | however using a function has some ease of implementation advantages and
|
|---|
| 63 | allows for easier disambiguation because the virtual type name (or the
|
|---|
| 64 | address of an instance that is in scope) can be used instead of the mangled
|
|---|
| 65 | virtual table name.
|
|---|
| 66 |
|
|---|
| 67 | Also note the use of the word ``promise" in the trait description. \CFA
|
|---|
| 68 | cannot currently check to see if either \codeCFA{exceptT} or
|
|---|
| 69 | \codeCFA{virtualT} match the layout requirements. Currently this is
|
|---|
| 70 | considered part of \codeCFA{get_exception_vtable}'s correct implementation.
|
|---|
| 71 |
|
|---|
| 72 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 73 | trait is_termination_exception(
|
|---|
| 74 | dtype exceptT, dtype virtualT | is_exception(exceptT, virtualT)) {
|
|---|
| 75 | void defaultTerminationHandler(exceptT &);
|
|---|
| 76 | };
|
|---|
| 77 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 78 | The only additional function required to make the exception usable with
|
|---|
| 79 | termination is a default handler. This function is called whenever a
|
|---|
| 80 | termination throw on an exception of this type is preformed and no handler
|
|---|
| 81 | is found.
|
|---|
| 82 |
|
|---|
| 83 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 84 | trait is_resumption_exception(
|
|---|
| 85 | dtype exceptT, dtype virtualT | is_exception(exceptT, virtualT)) {
|
|---|
| 86 | void defaultResumptionHandler(exceptT &);
|
|---|
| 87 | };
|
|---|
| 88 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 89 | Creating a resumption exception is exactly the same except for resumption.
|
|---|
| 90 | The name change reflects that and the function is called when a resumption
|
|---|
| 91 | throw on an exception of this type is preformed and no handler is found.
|
|---|
| 92 |
|
|---|
| 93 | Finally there are three additional macros that can be used to refer to the
|
|---|
| 94 | these traits. They are \codeCFA{IS_EXCEPTION},
|
|---|
| 95 | \codeCFA{IS_TERMINATION_EXCEPTION} and \codeCFA{IS_RESUMPTION_EXCEPTION}.
|
|---|
| 96 | Each takes the virtual type's name and, for polymorphic types only, the
|
|---|
| 97 | parenthesized list of polymorphic arguments. These do the name mangling to
|
|---|
| 98 | get the virtual table name and provide the arguments to both sides.
|
|---|
| 99 |
|
|---|
| 100 | \section{Termination}
|
|---|
| 101 |
|
|---|
| 102 | Termination exception throws are likely the most familiar kind, as they are
|
|---|
| 103 | used in several popular programming languages. A termination will throw an
|
|---|
| 104 | exception, search the stack for a handler, unwind the stack to where the
|
|---|
| 105 | handler is defined, execute the handler and then continue execution after
|
|---|
| 106 | the handler. They are used when execution cannot continue here.
|
|---|
| 107 |
|
|---|
| 108 | Termination has two pieces of syntax it uses. The first is the throw:
|
|---|
| 109 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 110 | throw EXPRESSION;
|
|---|
| 111 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 112 |
|
|---|
| 113 | The expression must evaluate to a reference to a termination exception. A
|
|---|
| 114 | termination exception is any exception with a
|
|---|
| 115 | \codeCFA{void defaultTerminationHandler(T &);} (the default handler) defined
|
|---|
| 116 | on it. The handler is taken from the call sight with \CFA's trait system and
|
|---|
| 117 | passed into the exception system along with the exception itself.
|
|---|
| 118 |
|
|---|
| 119 | The exception passed into the system is then copied into managed memory.
|
|---|
| 120 | This is to ensure it remains in scope during unwinding. It is the user's
|
|---|
| 121 | responsibility to make sure the original exception is freed when it goes out
|
|---|
| 122 | of scope. Being allocated on the stack is sufficient for this.
|
|---|
| 123 |
|
|---|
| 124 | Then the exception system will search the stack starting from the throw and
|
|---|
| 125 | proceeding towards the base of the stack, from callee to caller. As it goes
|
|---|
| 126 | it will check any termination handlers it finds:
|
|---|
| 127 |
|
|---|
| 128 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 129 | try {
|
|---|
| 130 | TRY_BLOCK
|
|---|
| 131 | } catch (EXCEPTION_TYPE * NAME) {
|
|---|
| 132 | HANDLER
|
|---|
| 133 | }
|
|---|
| 134 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 135 |
|
|---|
| 136 | This shows a try statement with a single termination handler. The statements
|
|---|
| 137 | in TRY\_BLOCK will be executed when control reaches this statement. While
|
|---|
| 138 | those statements are being executed if a termination exception is thrown and
|
|---|
| 139 | it is not handled by a try statement further up the stack the EHM will check
|
|---|
| 140 | all of the terminations handlers attached to the try block, top to bottom.
|
|---|
| 141 |
|
|---|
| 142 | At each handler the EHM will check to see if the thrown exception is a
|
|---|
| 143 | descendant of EXCEPTION\_TYPE. If it is the pointer to the exception is
|
|---|
| 144 | bound to NAME and the statements in HANDLER are executed. If control reaches
|
|---|
| 145 | the end of the handler then it exits the block, the exception is freed and
|
|---|
| 146 | control continues after the try statement.
|
|---|
| 147 |
|
|---|
| 148 | The default handler is only used if no handler for the exception is found
|
|---|
| 149 | after the entire stack is searched. When that happens the default handler
|
|---|
| 150 | is called with a reference to the exception as its only argument. If the
|
|---|
| 151 | handler returns control continues from after the throw statement.
|
|---|
| 152 |
|
|---|
| 153 | \paragraph{Conditional Catches}
|
|---|
| 154 |
|
|---|
| 155 | Catch clauses may also be written as:
|
|---|
| 156 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 157 | catch (EXCEPTION_TYPE * NAME ; CONDITION)
|
|---|
| 158 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 159 | This has the same behaviour as a regular catch clause except that if the
|
|---|
| 160 | exception matches the given type the condition is also run. If the result is
|
|---|
| 161 | true only then is this considered a matching handler. If the result is false
|
|---|
| 162 | then the handler does not match and the search continues with the next clause
|
|---|
| 163 | in the try block.
|
|---|
| 164 |
|
|---|
| 165 | The condition considers all names in scope at the beginning of the try block
|
|---|
| 166 | to be in scope along with the name introduce in the catch clause itself.
|
|---|
| 167 |
|
|---|
| 168 | \paragraph{Re-Throwing}
|
|---|
| 169 |
|
|---|
| 170 | You can also re-throw the most recent termination exception with
|
|---|
| 171 | \codeCFA{throw;}. % This is terrible and you should never do it.
|
|---|
| 172 | This can be done in a handler or any function that could be called from a
|
|---|
| 173 | handler.
|
|---|
| 174 |
|
|---|
| 175 | This will start another termination throw reusing the exception, meaning it
|
|---|
| 176 | does not copy the exception or allocated any more memory for it. However the
|
|---|
| 177 | default handler is still at the original through and could refer to data that
|
|---|
| 178 | was on the unwound section of the stack. So instead a new default handler that
|
|---|
| 179 | does a program level abort is used.
|
|---|
| 180 |
|
|---|
| 181 | \section{Resumption}
|
|---|
| 182 |
|
|---|
| 183 | Resumption exceptions are less popular then termination but in many
|
|---|
| 184 | regards are simpler and easier to understand. A resumption throws an exception,
|
|---|
| 185 | searches for a handler on the stack, executes that handler on top of the stack
|
|---|
| 186 | and then continues execution from the throw. These are used when a problem
|
|---|
| 187 | needs to be fixed before execution continues.
|
|---|
| 188 |
|
|---|
| 189 | A resumption is thrown with a throw resume statement:
|
|---|
| 190 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 191 | throwResume EXPRESSION;
|
|---|
| 192 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 193 | The result of EXPRESSION must be a resumption exception type. A resumption
|
|---|
| 194 | exception type is any type that satisfies the assertion
|
|---|
| 195 | \codeCFA{void defaultResumptionHandler(T &);} (the default handler). When the
|
|---|
| 196 | statement is executed the expression is evaluated and the result is thrown.
|
|---|
| 197 |
|
|---|
| 198 | Handlers are declared using clauses in try statements:
|
|---|
| 199 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 200 | try {
|
|---|
| 201 | TRY_BLOCK
|
|---|
| 202 | } catchResume (EXCEPTION_TYPE * NAME) {
|
|---|
| 203 | HANDLER
|
|---|
| 204 | }
|
|---|
| 205 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 206 | This is a simple example with the try block and a single resumption handler.
|
|---|
| 207 | Multiple resumption handlers can be put in a try statement and they can be
|
|---|
| 208 | mixed with termination handlers.
|
|---|
| 209 |
|
|---|
| 210 | When a resumption begins it will start searching the stack starting from
|
|---|
| 211 | the throw statement and working its way to the callers. In each try statement
|
|---|
| 212 | handlers will be tried top to bottom. Each handler is checked by seeing if
|
|---|
| 213 | the thrown exception is a descendant of EXCEPTION\_TYPE. If not the search
|
|---|
| 214 | continues. Otherwise NAME is bound to a pointer to the exception and the
|
|---|
| 215 | HANDLER statements are executed. After they are finished executing control
|
|---|
| 216 | continues from the throw statement.
|
|---|
| 217 |
|
|---|
| 218 | If no appropriate handler is found then the default handler is called. The
|
|---|
| 219 | throw statement acts as a regular function call passing the exception to
|
|---|
| 220 | the default handler and after the handler finishes executing control continues
|
|---|
| 221 | from the throw statement.
|
|---|
| 222 |
|
|---|
| 223 | The exception system also tracks the position of a search on the stack. If
|
|---|
| 224 | another resumption exception is thrown while a resumption handler is running
|
|---|
| 225 | it will first check handlers pushed to the stack by the handler and any
|
|---|
| 226 | functions it called, then it will continue from the try statement that the
|
|---|
| 227 | handler is a part of; except for the default handler where it continues from
|
|---|
| 228 | the throw the default handler was passed to.
|
|---|
| 229 |
|
|---|
| 230 | This makes the search pattern for resumption reflect the one for termination,
|
|---|
| 231 | which is what most users expect.
|
|---|
| 232 |
|
|---|
| 233 | % This might need a diagram. But it is an important part of the justification
|
|---|
| 234 | % of the design of the traversal order.
|
|---|
| 235 | It also avoids the recursive resumption problem. If the entire stack is
|
|---|
| 236 | searched loops of resumption can form. Consider a handler that handles an
|
|---|
| 237 | exception of type A by resuming an exception of type B and on the same stack,
|
|---|
| 238 | later in the search path, is a second handler that handles B by resuming A.
|
|---|
| 239 |
|
|---|
| 240 | Assuming no other handlers on the stack handle A or B then in either traversal
|
|---|
| 241 | system an A resumed from the top of the stack will be handled by the first
|
|---|
| 242 | handler. A B resumed from the top or from the first handler it will be handled
|
|---|
| 243 | by the second handler. The only difference is when A is thrown from the second
|
|---|
| 244 | handler. The entire stack search will call the first handler again, creating a
|
|---|
| 245 | loop. Starting from the position in the stack though will break this loop.
|
|---|
| 246 |
|
|---|
| 247 | \paragraph{Conditional Catches}
|
|---|
| 248 |
|
|---|
| 249 | Resumption supports conditional catch clauses like termination does. They
|
|---|
| 250 | use the same syntax except the keyword is changed:
|
|---|
| 251 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 252 | catchResume (EXCEPTION_TYPE * NAME ; CONDITION)
|
|---|
| 253 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 254 |
|
|---|
| 255 | It also has the same behaviour, after the exception type has been matched
|
|---|
| 256 | with the EXCEPTION\_TYPE the CONDITION is evaluated with NAME in scope. If
|
|---|
| 257 | the result is true then the handler is run, otherwise the search continues
|
|---|
| 258 | just as if there had been a type mismatch.
|
|---|
| 259 |
|
|---|
| 260 | \paragraph{Re-Throwing}
|
|---|
| 261 |
|
|---|
| 262 | You may also re-throw resumptions with a \codeCFA{throwResume;} statement.
|
|---|
| 263 | This can only be done from inside of a \codeCFA{catchResume} block.
|
|---|
| 264 |
|
|---|
| 265 | Outside of any side effects of any code already run in the handler this will
|
|---|
| 266 | have the same effect as if the exception had not been caught in the first
|
|---|
| 267 | place.
|
|---|
| 268 |
|
|---|
| 269 | \section{Finally Clauses}
|
|---|
| 270 |
|
|---|
| 271 | A \codeCFA{finally} clause may be placed at the end of a try statement after
|
|---|
| 272 | all the handler clauses. In the simply case, with no handlers, it looks like
|
|---|
| 273 | this:
|
|---|
| 274 |
|
|---|
| 275 | \begin{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 276 | try {
|
|---|
| 277 | TRY_BLOCK
|
|---|
| 278 | } finally {
|
|---|
| 279 | FINAL_STATEMENTS
|
|---|
| 280 | }
|
|---|
| 281 | \end{lstlisting}
|
|---|
| 282 |
|
|---|
| 283 | Any number of termination handlers and resumption handlers may proceed the
|
|---|
| 284 | finally clause.
|
|---|
| 285 |
|
|---|
| 286 | The FINAL\_STATEMENTS, the finally block, are executed whenever the try
|
|---|
| 287 | statement is removed from the stack. This includes: the TRY\_BLOCK finishes
|
|---|
| 288 | executing, a termination exception finishes executing and the stack unwinds.
|
|---|
| 289 |
|
|---|
| 290 | Execution of the finally block should finish by letting control run off
|
|---|
| 291 | the end of the block. This is because after the finally block is complete
|
|---|
| 292 | control will continue to where ever it would if the finally clause was not
|
|---|
| 293 | present.
|
|---|
| 294 |
|
|---|
| 295 | Because of this local control flow out of the finally block is forbidden.
|
|---|
| 296 | The compiler rejects uses of \codeCFA{break}, \codeCFA{continue},
|
|---|
| 297 | \codeCFA{fallthru} and \codeCFA{return} that would cause control to leave
|
|---|
| 298 | the finally block. Other ways to leave the finally block - such as a long
|
|---|
| 299 | jump or termination - are much harder to check, at best requiring additional
|
|---|
| 300 | run-time overhead, and so are merely discouraged.
|
|---|
| 301 |
|
|---|
| 302 | \section{Cancellation}
|
|---|
| 303 |
|
|---|
| 304 | Cancellation can be thought of as a stack-level abort or as an uncatchable
|
|---|
| 305 | termination. It unwinds the entirety of the current exception and if possible
|
|---|
| 306 | passes an exception to a different stack as a message.
|
|---|
| 307 |
|
|---|
| 308 | There is no special statement for starting a cancellation, instead you call
|
|---|
| 309 | the standard library function \codeCFA{cancel\_stack} which takes an exception.
|
|---|
| 310 | Unlike in a throw this exception is not used in control flow but is just there
|
|---|
| 311 | to pass information about why the cancellation happened.
|
|---|
| 312 |
|
|---|
| 313 | The handler is decided entirely by which stack is being canceled. There are
|
|---|
| 314 | three handlers that apply to three different groups of stacks:
|
|---|
| 315 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 316 | \item Main Stack:
|
|---|
| 317 | The main stack is the one on which the program main is called at the beginning
|
|---|
| 318 | of your program. It is also the only stack you have without the libcfathreads.
|
|---|
| 319 |
|
|---|
| 320 | Because of this there is no other stack ``above" (or possibly at all) for main
|
|---|
| 321 | to notify when a cancellation occurs. So after the stack is unwound we do a
|
|---|
| 322 | program level abort.
|
|---|
| 323 |
|
|---|
| 324 | \item Thread Stack:
|
|---|
| 325 | Thread stacks are those created \codeCFA{thread} or otherwise satisfy the
|
|---|
| 326 | \codeCFA{is\_thread} trait.
|
|---|
| 327 |
|
|---|
| 328 | Threads only have two structural points of communication that must happen,
|
|---|
| 329 | start and join. As the thread must be running to preform a cancellation it
|
|---|
| 330 | will be after start and before join, so join is one cancellation uses.
|
|---|
| 331 |
|
|---|
| 332 | After the stack is unwound the thread will halt as if had completed normally
|
|---|
| 333 | and wait for another thread to join with it. The other thread, when it joins,
|
|---|
| 334 | checks for a cancellation. If so it will throw the resumption exception
|
|---|
| 335 | \codeCFA{ThreadCancelled}.
|
|---|
| 336 |
|
|---|
| 337 | There is a difference here in how explicate joins (with the \codeCFA{join}
|
|---|
| 338 | function) and implicate joins (from a destructor call). Explicate joins will
|
|---|
| 339 | take the default handler (\codeCFA{defaultResumptionHandler}) from the context
|
|---|
| 340 | and use like a regular through does if the exception is not caught. The
|
|---|
| 341 | implicate join does a program abort instead.
|
|---|
| 342 |
|
|---|
| 343 | This is for safety. One of the big problems in exceptions is you cannot handle
|
|---|
| 344 | two terminations or cancellations on the same stack as either can destroy the
|
|---|
| 345 | context required for the other. This can happen with join but as the
|
|---|
| 346 | destructors will always be run when the stack is being unwound and one
|
|---|
| 347 | termination/cancellation is already active. Also since they are implicit they
|
|---|
| 348 | are easier to forget about.
|
|---|
| 349 |
|
|---|
| 350 | \item Coroutine Stack:
|
|---|
| 351 | Coroutine stacks are those created with \codeCFA{coroutine} or otherwise
|
|---|
| 352 | satisfy the \codeCFA{is\_coroutine} trait.
|
|---|
| 353 |
|
|---|
| 354 | A coroutine knows of two other coroutines, its starter and its last resumer.
|
|---|
| 355 | The last resumer is ``closer" so that is the one notified.
|
|---|
| 356 |
|
|---|
| 357 | After the stack is unwound control goes to the last resumer.
|
|---|
| 358 | Resume will resume throw a \codeCFA{CoroutineCancelled} exception, which is
|
|---|
| 359 | polymorphic over the coroutine type and has a pointer to the coroutine being
|
|---|
| 360 | canceled and the canceling exception. The resume function also has an
|
|---|
| 361 | assertion that the \codeCFA{defaultResumptionHandler} for the exception. So it
|
|---|
| 362 | will use the default handler like a regular throw.
|
|---|
| 363 |
|
|---|
| 364 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|