From: Darryl Green (green_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-07 19:40:52
> From: William E. Kempf [mailto:williamkempf_at_[hidden]]
> From: "Iain K.Hanson" <iain.hanson_at_[hidden]>
> > I read this as a request for the standard to be changed to
> accomadate MT
> > therefore an uncaught exception on an unjoined thread could
> result in
> > death not process termination. Maybe by calling thread_terminate( ).
> I think it's much more
> appropriate for this to result in a call to terminate(),
> which removes the
> issues of the main thread being different, and requires no
> language changes
> to support this.
Is it really that hard for the main thread to have a different terminate
handler from the others and/or for thread_terminate() to have per-thread
configurable handlers defaulting to calling terminate() unless something
more useful is registered?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk