[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ross Ridge) writes: > Robert Dewar writes: > >Yes, and that is what we would want for Ada, so I am puzzled by your > >sigh. All Ada needs to do is to issue a constraint_error exception, > >it does not need to know where the exception came from or why except > >in very broad detail. > > Unless printing "This application has requested the Runtime to terminate > it in an unusual way." counts an issuing a contraint_error in Ada, > it seems to me that -ftrapv and Ada have differing requirements. > How can you portabilty and correctly generate a constraint_error if > the code generated by -ftrapv calls the C runtime function abort()? > On Unix-like systems you can catch SIGABRT, but even there how do you > tell that it didn't come from CTRL-\, a signal sent from a different > process, or abort() called fom some other context? With INTO I don't > see any way distignuish the SIGSEGV it generates on Linux from any of > the myriad other ways a SIGSEGV can be generated.
Easy: The signal frame that is passed as an argument to the signal handler has a trapno member than will contain 4 for INTO. The only other case where it would contain 4 would be a explicit int 4 -Andi
