This is the mail archive of the ecos-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 8/11/06, Jonathan Larmour <jifl@jifvik.org> wrote:By implication from this code, you're trying to get C++ code to operate even before the kernel is initialised, hence the hoops with self==NULL. It's an invitation to problems. I'm extremely hesitant about trying to claim that C++ code will work at such an early stage of initialisation.
It's hard to argue against a fear about something that you believe might exist.
Even CYG_INIT_IO is after CYG_INIT_KERNEL, so I'm not clear what initialisation you are trying to support. C++ exceptions in the HAL? I'd surely have thought not, but if not but it's HAL code, why not just build with -fno-exceptions.
I'm decompressing an FPGA image while programming an FPGA. There are *many* things that can go wrong and this code is *greatly* simplified by having exceptions.
Decompressing the FPGA must happen before CYG_INIT_IO since there is a UART in the FPGA.
These changes also add bloat to support something that almost no-one will want to do, and are at best hardware specific.
Bloat? Isn't this so little as to nearly be a matter of subjective opinion? Doesn't POSIX threads get used in system that have a little more oomph so percentage wise this should be miniscule?
Jifl -- --["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |