From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-07 04:39:54
At Tuesday 2002/08/06 09:37, you wrote:
>From: "William E. Kempf" <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
>terminate() is invoked when there is no matching exception handler. If
>join() magically transports exceptions across thread boundaries, the
>exception thrown in main() will be caught by the join()ing thread, and
>things are fine and dandy.
>Unfortunately, when there is no join(), the uncaught exception must
>terminate the process, but we don't know in advance whether there will be a
>join() sometimes in the future!
I see an "unreported exception" just like any other resource leak.
we don't terminate processes because somebody forgets to do a delete
what's so "magic" about an exception?
>We can special case thread<void> to terminate on exceptions, of course, but
>a consistent specification would be better.
thread<nothrow> ?? (a poor attempt at levity)
maybe it should be a policy
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A
PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk