backtrace() vs. _Unwind_Backtrace()

Sat Dec 6 01:23:00 GMT 2003

On Dec 6, 2003, at 3:55 AM, Mohan Embar wrote:
>> Well, it's true that in general you no longer have to unwind through
>> exception handler frames. However, there's still a problem with
>> exceptions thrown in CNI code. I am proposing, probably post 3.4
>> split, to change CNI so that null pointer checks are enabled even in
>> CNI code.
>>> So, DWARF EH sounds like a batter plan. Unless there's some other
>> reason I don't know about...

The mingw people don't want DWARF EH for C/C++ because they need to 
throw through OS frames, and the OS frames of course don't have unwind 
info. So, unless another solution can be found for that, we'd need to 
enable DWARF EH for Java exceptions (and of course Java exceptions in 
CNI code), but not for standard C++ exceptions. I havn't investigated, 
but my feeling is that might not be trivial.
> I wasn't clear on whether you meant now or post-3.4.
>> (The CNI code is completely bug-free, so this shouldn't be an issue, 
> right?)

No, because various APIs are expected to throw NullPointer or 
ArrayIndex exceptions upon invalid input, but we don't want to have to 
explicitly check for these.
Regards
Bryce.