cuneiform team mailing list archive

[Alex Samorukov <samm@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jussi Pakkanen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, René Rebe <rene.rebe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>   
> > the attached patch allows compiling cuneiform on non-x86 platforms,
> > however PUMA_Init fails, AFAICS reading some data file and probably some
> > sanity checks failing due missing portable data file reads (such as
> > endianess swaps).
> >     
>
> Does someone know enough DOS/Windows programming to know why they are
> calling the interrupt? Does it have some special side-effects? Could
> we just get rid of it altogether and just use abort() everywhere?
>   
Yes, we can.

http://blogs.msdn.com/kangsu/archive/2005/09/07/462232.aspx

int 3 was a just signal for debugger. This allows the calling thread to 
signal the debugger to handle the exception.
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
> Post to     : cuneiform@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>