On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Ian Lepore <i...@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 <mar...@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'...
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"