Sounds good. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 29, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> wrote:

> I suggest you call raise(SIGABRT) directly so you don't see the weird 
> messages printed by the runtimes.
> 
> Andrei
> 
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> The error is still printed, I'm trying to create a core dump also. Sent from 
>> my iPhone
>> On Jul 29, 2010, at 5:07 PM, Walter Bright <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Unhandled exceptions should print the error message associated with the 
>>> exception. This is so that, for example, you can write a file copy program 
>>> without paying any attention to error messages. If an error happens, the 
>>> program will print the right error message.
>>> 
>>> Getting a core dump instead would be most unattractive.
>>> 
>>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>>> (posted here because so few people read the druntime list)
>>>> 
>>>> I've been working on allowing core dumps to be created when an unhandled 
>>>> exception is thrown in a D app.  To avoid some weirdness that arises when 
>>>> an exception is thrown beyond the scope of (C) main() I'm calling abort() 
>>>> after terminating everything possible and reporting the exception.  What 
>>>> I'm wondering is whether this is an acceptable way to terminate a D app in 
>>>> this situation or if I should do something else.  I was looking at the 
>>>> Win32 docs for abort() and they're a bit weird:
>>>> 
>>>>   By default, the abort routine prints the message:
>>>> 
>>>>   "This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an 
>>>> unusual way. Please contact the application's support team for more 
>>>> information."
>>>> 
>>>>   It then calls raise(SIGABRT).
>>>> 
>>>> Even on OSX I see an "Abort trap" message in the console when I exit an 
>>>> app in this way.  I'm inclined to think that this isn't acceptable and 
>>>> that I should just try and sort out the weirdness that results from 
>>>> throwing an object outside of main(), but I thought I'd ask here for 
>>>> suggestions.  As an alternative I could call asm HLT, but this may bypass 
>>>> too much C-level runtime stuff.  Thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

Reply via email to