From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-08 04:52:53
At Wednesday 2002/08/07 03:51, you wrote:
>From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]>
> > >We can special case thread<void> to terminate on exceptions, of course,
> > >a consistent specification would be better.
> > thread<nothrow> ?? (a poor attempt at levity)
>The more I think of it, the more I like the thread<void> special case. It is
>logical: when you ask for a thread that returns a value, this implies that
>you will join() that thread. When you use thread<void>, you don't care about
>the return value.
>This allows users to choose the exception handling policy in a natural way
>(often requested) without resorting to the...
> > maybe it should be a policy
>.... "We don't know how to design it, so we'll leave the design to you! Don't
>you feel empowered?" method.
I wasn't suggesting we add a policy arg and NOT supply some meaningful
>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