On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 12:07 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> You're talking about C++ exceptions in general, but the problems you
> mention seems to be issues with specific implementation properties.

Possibly true, but this argument - that all the problems are related to
specific implementation and thus can be easily fixed - is the same for
years and yet the problem is still there (; I guess that if this could
be easily fixed, then it would be done years ago. Along with the
performance and non-deterministic execution issues...

> If the comments above are referring to the libstdc++ verbose
> terminate
> handler, that's configurable. Configuring GCC with
> --disable-libstdcxx-verbose will disable that, and so will building
> libstdc++ with -fno-exceptions. That was fixed years ago.

True, sorry for the confusion, indeed I was talking about verbose
terminate handler. I check the state of C++ exceptions for MCUs only
once every few years, so that's why I got that mixed with
std::terminate(). I use my custom compilation with disabled exceptions
(toolchain & libstdc++ built with -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti) and this
works perfectly fine.

Anyway... If you have to recompile the toolchain, the problem is still
there. Most of the people (like 99,666%) will not do that for various
reasons. Some don't know how, some use only Windows, some don't have
time to deal with the compilation (the whole toolchain takes around an
hour here, but this excludes the time to prepare the script that builds
it), some other consider the toolchain provided by MCU vendor (or by
ARM) as "tested to work correctly" so they don't want to replace that
with their custom built solution, and so on, and so on...

Regards,
FCh

Reply via email to