From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-20 16:20:01
----- Original Message -----
From: "bill_kempf" <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> > It occurred to me that maybe the disable_cancellation class should
> > defer cancellation, rather then prevent it. It isn't clear in the
> > documentation which of the two behaviors it will have. The reason
> > deferred cancellation is so the application doesn't have to keep
> > trying to cancel a thread until it finally succeeds. Implementation
> > would be simple: disabling/deferring cancellation doesn't prevent
> > cancel flag from being set, just from being acted on.
> I thought the documentation covered this well enough. Nothing ever
> prevents another thread from requesting the thread be cancelled.
> Disabling simply means that cancellation points do not throw
> regardless of any such pending requests.
I think Tom was concerned with whether the request gets discarded or will be
acted upon at the next cancellation point encountered with cancellation
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk