seh_try_macros2-00

[Steven Edwards]

There is some discussion on mingw-developer about merging Capsers SEH 
patches but there are patent issues as borland owns the patent on C++ 
Style EH in C. The patent is BS as it even sights prior art but still I 
dont know who wants to take the risk on going to court for this. Now 
that M$ owns a large chunck of borland this might happen.

Here is the email in question

<snip>

Well, I don't think I have the time for this. It was quite a battle to
get the fastcall patch into gcc, and this was only a (IIRC) ~10 or ~20 KB patch. Compare
that to the SEH patch which is ~370 KB (and not even complete yet) and which may
even violate Borland's patent. The patch is also written by me when I was a gcc
newbie and I have probably made some mistakes. It would be nice if an experienced gcc
hacker would review and improve the patch.

I will however help in any way I can integrating the patch into gcc 3.4
if needed.

Finally, a gcc with only __try/__finally is only marginally better than
a gcc without
any SEH at all.

Casper Hornstrup



Alexandre Julliard wrote:

>"Gregory M. Turner" <gmturner007 at ameritech.net> writes:
>
>  
>
>>I guess the first question to ask, before all of the above is: which is a 
>>worse sacrifice for wine?  Requiring compiler support for this, or an extra 
>>parsing phase?  Or just having a broken dummy implementation like we do now?  
>>    
>>
>
>For Winelib apps, the solution is to add support to the compiler. For
>IDL-generated code, the solution is to make our IDL compiler generate
>code that uses the existing __TRY macros (or even generates the C code
>directly without using the macros if this allows more optimizations).
>
>  
>