On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 2:22 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > There's still the open question what -fnon-call-exceptions on its
> > own should do - IMHO it doesn't make sense to allow unwiding
> > from a trapping memory reference but not from the call it resides
> > in which means -fnon-call-exceptio
> There's still the open question what -fnon-call-exceptions on its
> own should do - IMHO it doesn't make sense to allow unwiding
> from a trapping memory reference but not from the call it resides
> in which means -fnon-call-exceptions should better enable
> -fexceptions?
Or issue a warning that
On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 9:26 AM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
>
> Hi Richard and Eric,
> Of course, you're both completely right. Rather than argue that
> -fnon-call-exceptions without -fexceptions (and without
> -fdelete-dead-exceptions) has some implicit undocumented semantics,
> trapping instructions s
Hi Richard and Eric,
Of course, you're both completely right. Rather than argue that
-fnon-call-exceptions without -fexceptions (and without
-fdelete-dead-exceptions) has some implicit undocumented semantics,
trapping instructions should be completely orthogonal to exception
handling.
This patch
