Re: [boost] Re: Ending/canceling/suspending a thread (proposal)

From: duncan_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-08-23 13:23:09

williamkempf_at_[hidden] () wrote:

> --- In boost_at_y..., duncan_at_s... wrote:
 ...
> > When an exception other than thread_end (or derived) escapes from 
> the 
> > thread procedure I would strongly prefer it to stop the whole 
> program 
> > (process). This should be the default behaviour. It causes too much 
> > grief during program development, especially for those who are 
> still 
> > getting to grips with the system for the default to be silent 
> thread 
> > exit. I've had bad experiences with Java in this regard. They were 
> not 
> > horrendously bad, but wasted quite a bit of time on several 
> occasions.
> 
> Any number of things can cause "silent thread exit".  Cancelation, 
> calls to exit(), simply returning from the entry function.  All 
> exhibit the same behavior as that proposed for exception handling.  I 
> see no real issue here.

Alexander seems to agree with me. The issue is that a coding mistake 
which causes a throw, rather than say a segv, is silent. For a person 
learning threads that is not terribly helpful.

--
Duncan Harris, Sapio Design Ltd, Manchester, U.K.