Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible?

Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com>
Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:24:25 -0700

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Re: Is multi-level function return possible? federation2005@netzero.com (2014-03-26)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? rpw3@rpw3.org (2014-03-27)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2014-03-27)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? usenet@bitblocks.com (Bakul Shah) (2014-03-26)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-03-27)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2014-03-28)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? acolvin@efunct.com (mac) (2014-03-28)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-03-28)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2014-03-29)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2014-03-29)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-03-29)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-03-28)
Re: precise and imprecise, was catch and throw, was Is multi-level fun ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-03-28)
Re: catch and throw, was Is multi-level function return possible? alan@scooby-doo.csail.mit.edu (Alan Bawden) (2014-03-29)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:24:25 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: 14-03-065 14-03-068 14-03-070 14-03-076
Keywords: errors, architecture, history
Posted-Date: 28 Mar 2014 21:46:26 EDT

On 3/28/2014 4:08 PM, mac wrote:


> Not quite the same. ON defined a handler invoked at the signal site. It
> could attempt repair and return. more like an interrupt. However, the
> typical handler did a non-local GOTO to bail out, clearing any calls
> between the signal and the gone-to label.
>
> I still think that the ability to resume can be useful.


Useful or no, the ability to resume requires retaining the illusion of
sequential execution. You have no idea how expensive, in power and
performance, that illusion is. And it's flat-out impossible on wide
issue machine such as VLIWs.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.