User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

No thanks.

No thanks.

Posted Nov 10, 2012 23:08 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: No thanks. by Cyberax
Parent article: Haley: We're doing an ARM64 OpenJDK port!

I actually solved this once with a really ugly exception-unwinder (implemented mostly in macros with one fugly bit of arch-dependent code). A few years later I had to port it to a new platform and wished I'd done something else.

(btw, I wish you'd be less bloody combative all the time. You turn every discussion on LWN into a minor war.)


(Log in to post comments)

No thanks.

Posted Nov 11, 2012 0:45 UTC (Sun) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

Kettle, meet pot. :-D
But j/k, I love your discussions. From both of you. I learn a lot.

No thanks.

Posted Nov 11, 2012 5:12 UTC (Sun) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]

>I actually solved this once with a really ugly exception-unwinder (implemented mostly in macros with one fugly bit of arch-dependent code).
Yup. Each sufficiently complex error handling system is indistinguishable from exceptions.

> (btw, I wish you'd be less bloody combative all the time. You turn every discussion on LWN into a minor war.)
Well, it's clear for me that there are only two kinds of opinions: mine and incorrect. I don't understand why other people still disagree.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds