HI! Steven Edwards wrote:
On 4/28/06, KJKHyperion hackbunny@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.
LOL! YEAH! We are getting back to normal!
-- Steven Edwards
Thanks, James