On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Ian Lepore <ian_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 09:04 -0700, Conrad Meyer wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Mark Millard <markmi_at_dsl-only.net> > > wrote: > > > > > > Luckily most kernel and world code that I actively use > > > does not throw C++ exceptions in my use. > > > > > > But devel/kyua is majorly broken by the C++ exception > > > issue: It makes extensive use of C++ exceptions. In my > > > view that disqualifies clang as being "close": I view > > > my activity as a hack until devel/kyua is generally > > > operable and so available for use in testing. > > I don't think that is a major roadblock; a broken port is a broken > > port. Kyua is a relatively unimportant one for most users. In this > > particular case, maybe kyua (a leaf binary) could be built with GCC > > instead of Clang on any platform with broken C++ exceptions. > > > > Best, > > Conrad > > It isn't about "a broken port". All C++ code is broken if exceptions > don't work. That means devd is broken. Not to mention clang itself. > It may be that neither of those relies on exceptions for routine > operation and uses them only for error handling, and errors mostly > don't happen. There is plenty of C++ code in the world where > exceptions are used in non-fatal-error cases and where the applications > just don't work at all without them. > I'm with Ian: Broken C++ exceptions means a broken C++ compiler. It's best to think of it like the tertiary operator being wonky in 'C'... WarnerReceived on Fri Oct 06 2017 - 14:29:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:13 UTC