Changeset ec35498 for doc/working/exception/impl/exception.c

Timestamp:

Jun 16, 2017, 9:57:33 PM (7 years ago)

Author:

Thierry Delisle <tdelisle@…>

Branches:

ADT, aaron-thesis, arm-eh, ast-experimental, cleanup-dtors, deferred_resn, demangler, enum, forall-pointer-decay, jacob/cs343-translation, jenkins-sandbox, master, new-ast, new-ast-unique-expr, new-env, no_list, persistent-indexer, pthread-emulation, qualifiedEnum, resolv-new, with_gc

Children:

0b33412

Parents:

4e6fb8e (diff), 42b0d73 (diff)
Note: this is a merge changeset, the changes displayed below correspond to the merge itself.
Use the (diff) links above to see all the changes relative to each parent.

Message:

Merge branch 'master' of plg.uwaterloo.ca:software/cfa/cfa-cc

File:

• doc/working/exception/impl/exception.c (modified) (1 diff)

doc/working/exception/impl/exception.c

@@ -44 +44 @@
         __throw_terminate(except);
         // TODO: Default handler for resumption.
+}
+
+/* QUESTION: Could interupts interact with exception handling?
+Ex. could an context switch stop execution, and we get an exception when we
+come back? Is so resumption has to go:
++ create node (init next and handler)
++ prepare cleanup (add a cleanup hook with the ..._cleaup function)
+  also the cleanup has to be the next node, not just a pop from the list.
++ push node on the list (change the existing node)
+Which if an exception can come from anywhere, might just be required to ensure
+the list is valid.
+
+void __try_resume_setup(struct __try_resume_node * node,
+                        bool (*handler)(exception except) {
+        node->next = shared_stack.top_resume;
+        node->try_to_handle = handler;
+        shared_stack.top_resume = node;
+}*/
+
+// We have a single cleanup function
+void __try_resume_cleanup(struct __try_resume_node * node) {
+        shared_stack.top_resume = node->next;
 }