Re: [boost] Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions

From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-08 05:00:45

At Wednesday 2002/08/07 07:35, you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]>
>To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 4:39 AM
>Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions
>
>
> > At Tuesday 2002/08/06 09:37, you wrote:
> > >From: "William E. Kempf" <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> > >[deleted]
> > >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?
>
>The C++ standard explicitly defines the behavior here.  I suppose that's the
>"magic" you're referring to.

The C++ standard is silent on the topic of thread(s)

>Bill Kempf
>_______________________________________________
>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"