Sure. On May 1, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Since we've been looking into this now and we have a solution in our > collective mental caches, is there please a chance to effect this change for > this beta? I'm telling you, it is an _important_ step forward in unittesting > D programs. > > Thanks! > > Andrei > > On 05/01/2010 01:19 AM, Sean Kelly wrote: >> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote: >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Sean Kelly<[email protected]> >>>> >>>> On Apr 28, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >>>> It's not hard to write a segfault handler that >>>> does this, but it involves doing technically illegal stuff in a signal >>>> handler >>>> (either IO or throwing an exception) so I don't want to make it a built-in >>>> feature. >>> >>> syscalls are always legal because syscalls exit when signals occur >>> (technically, they aren't even calls, they are software interrupts). In >>> other words, printf is illegal, write is not. >> >> I think it's a bit more restrictive than that, but you're right. If it >> helps, the list of signal-safe functions I use for reference is here: >> >> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/xsh_chap02_04.html >> _______________________________________________ >> dmd-internals mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
