Re: [boost] Re: first sight

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-18 08:49:37

From: "terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "bill_kempf" <williamkempf_at_h...> wrote:
> [...]
> Mr. Butenhoff agreed with our decisions on N4
>
> Where can I find this newspaper, Bill?
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=kZ7h7.623%24bB1.30401%
> 40news.cpqcorp.net

Great link.

> "> My second question is whether the C++ catch(...),
>  > which means "catch all exceptions", should be
>  > allowed to catch the pthread cancelation exception.
>  > On Tru64 Unix, catch(...) does catch pthread
>  > cancelations.
>
>  Yes, it should; but you should always re-"throw"
>  unless you're really sure you want to break the
>  entire world. I think that should ALWAYS be true
>  for an anonymous catch(...), though. If you don't
>  know what it is, you can't "finalize" the exception
>  recovery, and you need to just clean up your own
>  local context and let someone else further down
>  handle it.

Something that I've been trying to say from the start. Cancellation/thread
exit is a C++ exception. Everything else simply falls out from general C++
exception handling principles. catch(...) blocks should nearly always
rethrow not because of thread cancellation, but because this is usually the
right way to handle exceptions.

--
Peter Dimov
Multi Media Ltd.