From: Godmar Back (gback@cs.utah.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 16 1998 - 15:46:25 EST
>
> Guys,
>
> We could use the 'exceptObj' in the Thread context (which really should
> be a java.lang.Throwable and not a kaffe.util.Ptr since that's what it
> points at - I should fix that) to hold any pending exception, just like
> the JNI does. However I take the point that we couldn't use the
> standard mechanism to construct the exception object - so the throwable
> would have to be hand crafted in the C code, which would be okay
> I suppose.
>
I still see two independent issues here:
first, do we want to rely on thread-specific data instead of passing a
pointer along. Second, should we store pending as throwables or not.
As for the first question:
I'm willing to go with the first solution (except that I know we will
have to trick in the initialization, which I don't really like.)
Also, if Kaffe ever goes to multiple instances, we'll most likely
have to carry a pointer along anyway. Also, it seems to me that
the functions we're talking about are not in the inner loop of any
application: it's all loading, linking, jitting, etc.
As for storing throwables (and handcrafting them) I'm somewhat skeptical.
That doesn't seem to be a good trade-off to me: save one word per thread ---
which sums up the savings --- and introduce another dependency between
Java and VM code.
Would you guys mind if I finish up what I'm working on and check that
in; so you can look at it and we can decide whether make change one
and/or change two later?
- Godmar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:03 EDT