[dmd-internals] changeset 455

[Jason House]

Honestly, with proper support for debug info, this kind of change is  
pretty meaningless to me on the *nix side. For any program seg fault,  
either dump a core and examine, or rerun in a debugger.

Any environment or toolchain which doesn't allow that really shouldn't  
be used.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 1, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com>  
wrote:

> Since we've been looking into this now and we have a solution in our  
> collective mental caches, is there please a chance to effect this  
> change for this beta? I'm telling you, it is an _important_ step  
> forward in unittesting D programs.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Andrei
>
> On 05/01/2010 01:19 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Sean Kelly<sean at invisibleduck.org>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 28, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> It's not hard to write a segfault handler that
>>>> does this, but it involves doing technically illegal stuff in a  
>>>> signal handler
>>>> (either IO or throwing an exception) so I don't want to make it a  
>>>> built-in
>>>> feature.
>>>
>>> syscalls are always legal because syscalls exit when signals occur  
>>> (technically, they aren't even calls, they are software  
>>> interrupts).  In other words, printf is illegal, write is not.
>>
>> I think it's a bit more restrictive than that, but you're right.   
>> If it helps, the list of signal-safe functions I use for reference  
>> is here:
>>
>> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/xsh_chap02_04.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-internals mailing list
>> dmd-internals at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-internals mailing list
> dmd-internals at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals