On 4/28/06, KJKHyperion <hackbunny(a)reactos.com>
wrote:
oh dear. First: HAHAHAHAHA LOOK AT THE MAMA'S
BOY, CRY BOY CRY. Then:
it's not "patented" per se. Only the stack-based implementation on x86
(NO WE CANNOT USE ANOTHER IMPLEMENTATION. Really beary totally
absolutely positively sure), and even then only if compiler-integrated.
Since GCC doesn't use stack-based exception handling *anywhere*, not
even on x86, that'd be a total non-issue. On operating systems as yet
unblessed by SEH it'd be even better as a starting point: a single
implementation shared by all architectures upfront. And lack of compiler
support is only really a problem on non-x86, because on x86 you can use
PSEH, which isn't covered by the patent
I would say I agree that PSEH was a option even if the syntax is not
100% compatible and it could be a good case for someone like Luke
working on pretty pseh seeing as it was rotting the last time I
checked but rather than have a productive discussion about the issues
I'll switch to further ad-hominem,
Piss off, get a life, do something productive or just shut the fuck up.