> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 04/18/2012 05:39 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> Well, if SJLJ lowering happens as gimple pass somewhere near the end of > >> gimple > >> queue, this should not be problem at all. (and implementation would be > >> cleaner) > > > > If you can find a clean way of separating sjlj expansion from dw2 expansion, > > please do. But there's a lot of code shared between the two. I see nothing > > wrong with always expanding via tablejump. > > In that case, would something like the following patch be acceptable? > I have verified that all targets that always set > TARGET_EXCEPT_UNWIND_INFO define casesi and/or tablejump. > > > * toplev.c (process_options): Fail for sjlj exceptions if the > target machine > has no casesi insn and no tablejump insn.
Isn't SJLJ used by default for Ada on all targets? Honza
