xiaobai added a comment. In D61776#1498225 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61776#1498225>, @jingham wrote:
> If you really are going to support many languages you need to figure out how > to tell folks what really happened with more specificity. I agree. > For instance, you can use C++ to throw anything, so you could throw an ObjC > object from a C++ exception throw. So you need to distinguish between the > language of the exception thrown (which is captured by the ValueObject you > return) and the language runtime throwing the language. So we need a way to > query that. Also, there's no formula reason why you couldn't have two > languages throwing an exception at the same time (for instance if a C++ > exception is unwinding the stack and the destructor of some ObjC object that > is getting destroyed throws an NSException, etc... So there needs to be some > way to handle that. > > This change isn't wrong but it gives a false impression of generality which > makes it less well motivated. Better support for exception handling is definitely something we should work towards. This patch doesn't actually change behavior, but I understand your concern that generalizing will make it look like things are better supported than they actually are. My motivation behind this change is removing language-specific knowledge from Thread, which is a goal that I think is worth pursuing. I could preserve/modify the comments that were there noting that only ObjC works right now. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61776/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61776 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
