From owner-freebsd-current Sun Apr 4 11:11:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [209.249.129.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8860214F39 for ; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:11:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA62995; Sun, 4 Apr 1999 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199904041807.LAA62995@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: obrien@NUXI.com Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: show stopper for EGCS import In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 04 Apr 1999 10:48:22 PDT." <19990404104822.I75313@nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 11:07:48 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Why are exceptions handling on by default better yet do we know why exception handling is not needed by default with gcc-2.8? and has anyone spent time reading the egcs requirements for exception handling? Amancio > On Sun, Apr 04, 1999 at 10:39:15AM -0700, Amancio Hasty wrote: > > > > What do you mean by: we are going to have to use ""sjlj-exceptions" type > > exception machanism for a while? > > -fsjlj-exceptions is on by default. > > -- > -- David (obrien@NUXI.com -or- obrien@FreeBSD.org) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message