[LLVMdev] 2.4 Pre-release (v1) Available for Testing
robert.a.zeh at gmail.com
Sun Oct 12 18:15:57 PDT 2008
You're right that LLVM may be left in an unusable state --- I've
encountered that problem on my own.
However, even a simple exit function would be useful. If, instead of
calling abort, LLVM called a function pointer I provided life would be
much easier. Even if the function call simply threw up a crash screen
life would be better than calling abort. Ideally I'd like to throw an
exception, and terminate gracefully.
>> Which makes me curious, if I submitted a patch that got rid of llvms
>> use of abort()s all over the place, and replaces them with exceptions
>> (the program dies either way if it is unhandled, but with exceptions
>> you at least get a chance to handle it and recover),
> since LLVM may well be left in an inconsistent state internally if
> an exception is thrown, it wouldn't be safe to continue using it
> after catching an exception.
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
More information about the llvm-dev