Now I got the exceptions to work.
I have not been able to find how to control the libgcc build
process. The configure script seems not to know that I give
different defaults for the compiler in --with switches. Configure
still assumes the compiler defaults arm mode although it is in
thumb mod
Am Sun, 09 Mar 2014 07:57:45 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> Now I got the exceptions to work.
>
> I have not been able to find how to control the libgcc build
> process. The configure script seems not to know that I give
> different defaults for the compiler in --with switches. Configure
>
On Sunday, 9 March 2014 at 07:57:46 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
Now I got the exceptions to work.
Nice Work! Congratulations!
I read your wiki, but didn't see your source code yet (I assume
its coming, yes?). Anyway, thanks for sharing this information.
Mike
On Friday, 7 March 2014 at 18:41:35 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> To make sure that libgcc
> is built correctly for Cortex-M4 you have to specify
> "--with-arch=armv7e-m --with-cpu=cortex-m4 --with-mode=thumb
> --with-tune=" when configuring gcc/gdc.
>
Gcc build fails with these. It will take time
Am Sun, 02 Mar 2014 18:33:00 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Sunday, 2 March 2014 at 15:36:01 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> > To make sure that libgcc
> > is built correctly for Cortex-M4 you have to specify
> > "--with-arch=armv7e-m --with-cpu=cortex-m4 --with-mode=thumb
> > --with-tune=" whe
On Sunday, 2 March 2014 at 15:36:01 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
To make sure that libgcc
is built correctly for Cortex-M4 you have to specify
"--with-arch=armv7e-m --with-cpu=cortex-m4 --with-mode=thumb
--with-tune=" when configuring gcc/gdc.
(And I don't see these flags mentioned in
https://bitb
Am Sun, 02 Mar 2014 11:20:53 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 12:53:14 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>
> >
> > However, someone also had this problem on this german site:
> > http://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/312956
> >
> > and the solution was that -mcpu alone was no
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 12:53:14 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
However, someone also had this problem on this german site:
http://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/312956
and the solution was that -mcpu alone was not good enough, he
had to specify -march flags as well so please double-check your
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 11:46:03 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I checked my code and the library code and there is no other
call like this. I think there is one thing that makes this
function special: if I understand correct, this function will
not return. If there is some noreturn attribute
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 10:49:57 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 09:24:40 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 08:56:26 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
There is nothing interesting in the assembly, only this wrong
call.
This form of instruction is just missing in
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 09:24:40 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 08:56:26 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
There is nothing interesting in the assembly, only this wrong
call.
This form of instruction is just missing in M4 and it gives an
invalid instruction fault. So what are we argu
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 08:56:26 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
There is nothing interesting in the assembly, only this wrong
call.
This form of instruction is just missing in M4 and it gives an
invalid instruction fault. So what are we arguing about?
If this is so hard for us to find, no wonder
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 07:53:45 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 07:26:16 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I investigated this a little. It seems that the processor
gets a fault interrupt when calling _Unwind_RaiseException
in _d_throw. The status bits indicate an invalid instructio
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 07:26:16 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I investigated this a little. It seems that the processor
gets a fault interrupt when calling _Unwind_RaiseException in
_d_throw. The status bits indicate an invalid instruction
code.
When looking at the disassembly I see that the
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 02:59:37 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 21:18:05 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ excepti
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 21:18:05 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything i
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception
handling, so
if C++ worked and
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 19:13:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau
wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception
handling, so
if C++ worked and
On Wednesday, 8 January 2014 at 15:52:25 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
Stupid question, but are C++ exceptions working for you? I
think we
don't change anything inthe compiler related to exception
handling, so
if C++ worked and D didn't it could only be a problem with the
runtime
code?
I have
Am Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:37:43 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:21:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
> > On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> >
> >> I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream.
> >> Here's a
> >> fix for the E
On 8 January 2014 08:37, Timo Sintonen wrote:
> On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:21:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
>>
>> On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>>
>>> I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream. Here's a
>>> fix for the EABI unwinder:
>>>
>>>
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:21:36 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream.
Here's a
fix for the EABI unwinder:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/commit/262e432e95cbe31a6764cd337f64022a5
On Sunday, 5 January 2014 at 10:06:48 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
I should really start pushing my local ARM changes upstream.
Here's a
fix for the EABI unwinder:
https://github.com/jpf91/GDC/commit/262e432e95cbe31a6764cd337f64022a56011eda
IIRC I also thought the code in gcc/deh.d wasn't correct
Am Sun, 05 Jan 2014 08:26:16 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> On Thursday, 2 January 2014 at 06:54:18 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
> > I have fond one thing that confuses me. I have defined
> > ARM_EABI_UNWINDER but gcc/deh.d has checks for
> > GNU_ARM_EABI_Unwinder. Is this what I should have? Wh
On Thursday, 2 January 2014 at 06:54:18 UTC, Timo Sintonen wrote:
I have fond one thing that confuses me. I have defined
ARM_EABI_UNWINDER but gcc/deh.d has checks for
GNU_ARM_EABI_Unwinder. Is this what I should have? When using
this I get an error in line 116: static assert ( 8 == 4 ) is
fal
I have fond one thing that confuses me. I have defined
ARM_EABI_UNWINDER but gcc/deh.d has checks for
GNU_ARM_EABI_Unwinder. Is this what I should have? When using
this I get an error in line 116: static assert ( 8 == 4 ) is
false.
Am Wed, 01 Jan 2014 14:02:42 +
schrieb "Timo Sintonen" :
> I started to update minlibd with gdc head from last saturday.
> While testing if exceptions work, the program just stops and does
> not reach catch or abort.
>
> Before investigating further, I want to ask the status of arm
> excep
On Wednesday, 1 January 2014 at 15:19:01 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 1 Jan 2014 14:05, "Timo Sintonen"
wrote:
I started to update minlibd with gdc head from last saturday.
While
testing if exceptions work, the program just stops and does not
reach catch
or abort.
Before investigating furth
On 1 Jan 2014 14:05, "Timo Sintonen" wrote:
>
> I started to update minlibd with gdc head from last saturday. While
testing if exceptions work, the program just stops and does not reach catch
or abort.
>
> Before investigating further, I want to ask the status of arm exceptions:
are they known to
29 matches
Mail list logo
