Boost logo

Boost :

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-08-06 08:59:14

--- In boost_at_y..., "Hillel Y. Sims" <hys420_at_y...> wrote:
> Pthreads has a limited, well-defined set of cancellation points
> ordinary conditions), thus is it 100% possible and not that
difficult to
> write completely non-throwing code even with thread-cancellation
> implemented in terms of exceptions in a pthreads-based environment,
> simply avoiding any functions that could potentially evoke a
> thread-cancellation exception (since it's not valid to use catch
(...) {}
> to swallow these exceptions, we would have to completely avoid
> any of these calls inside true non-throwing code, but that doesn't
> seem like a horrible restriction).

This means you can never make a call to a routine defined as a
cancelation point within a destructor. Much too restrictive for me.

> (I don't really do Windows, so I don't know if it has similar thread
> cancellation semantics..)

Windows has no cancellation semantics, only asynchronous termination,
which is 1000 times worse.

Bill Kempf

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at