Related articles |
---|
Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis possi sdm7g@elvis.med.virginia.edu (Steven D. Majewski) (1995-07-21) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p bobduff@world.std.com (1995-07-26) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p macrakis@osf.org (1995-07-28) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p chase@centerline.com (1995-07-28) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p pardo@cs.washington.edu (1995-08-03) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p mfinney@inmind.com (1995-08-07) |
Re: Implementation and Optimization of exceptions ( static analysis p bill@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (1995-08-13) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel) |
Keywords: | errors, optimize |
Organization: | Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle |
References: | 95-07-142 95-08-019 |
Date: | Thu, 3 Aug 1995 04:29:25 GMT |
macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis) writes:
>[Mechanisms for handling exceptions:
> - Stack-frame based
> - Special exception stack
> - Address range table]
I believe you can also follow each `call' instruction with a word of
data that effectively implements the address range table and/or a call
instruction that jumps to code that handles the exception. However,
the normal procedure call/return needs to be set up to jump past the
exception code that follows the call and the code growth is
proporitional to the number of callers not the number of callees.
;-D on ( Except... ) Pardo
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.