Jussi Pakkanen wrote:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, René Rebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the attached patch allows compiling cuneiform on non-x86 platforms,
however PUMA_Init fails, AFAICS reading some data file and probably some
sanity checks failing due missing portable data file reads (such as
endianess swaps).
Does someone know enough DOS/Windows programming to know why they are
calling the interrupt? Does it have some special side-effects? Could
we just get rid of it altogether and just use abort() everywhere?
Yes, we can.
http://blogs.msdn.com/kangsu/archive/2005/09/07/462232.aspx
int 3 was a just signal for debugger. This allows the calling thread to
signal the debugger to handle the exception.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
