Re: C++ Exceptions Status

[Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>]

Tom Tromey wrote:
> > > > > > "Phil" == Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> writes:
> > > > > >             
>
> Phil> I've written this up to accompany the call today.
>
> Thanks.  I'm still reading most of this but wanted to address one
> particular thing sooner.
>
> Phil> The issue that I am currently wrestling with is how specific is this
> Phil> unwind and exception work to C++? Are Java and Python exceptions
> Phil> handled in the same way? And how can we avoid language specific
> Phil> semantics in very general commands like "next"? Can we?
>
> Our primary focus is C++ and C (though we don't talk about the latter
> much since it works well :).
>
> Debugging Python or other languages -- let's simply not worry about
> it.  If we need this someday (I dunno, we might), it will take an
> special effort.  Debugging an interpreted language would require far
> more than fixes to exception handling -- it would also require changes
> to stack tracing, to breakpoint setting, to expression parsing and/or
> evaluation, etc.
>   

This has come up a few times, and I think the way I wrote this was not 
clear.  So let me clarify - it was purely a rhetorical question. I'm not 
looking at any language issues other than C++. But purely from the point 
of view that the  exception support in GDB is pretty generic, and in 
order to improve that I think we need to move to language specific 
solutions. I was purely musing along the lines that if we provide a 
specific solution context regarding C++, how it can be done in harmony 
with any other language specific support.

Regards

Phil