On 8 August 2013 13:21, William ML Leslie <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, maintaining that kind of stack makes setting up a try
> block more expensive than usual (I think it costs nothing on the CLR),
> but it's nowhere near as expensive as saguaro stacks or keeping the
> entire stack live.

Actually, I guess that the handler itself could decide if it wants to
set the stack pointer before proceeding or wants to run without
destroying the stack.  When an unwind is necessary, we can encode that
into the handler.

-- 
William Leslie

Notice:
Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered
under copyright law.  You absolutely may reproduce any part of it in
accordance with the copyright law of the nation you are reading this
in.  Any attempt to deny you those rights would be illegal without
prior contractual agreement.
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to