From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-09 17:30:31
David Abrahams wrote:
> > thrown (or may be something equivalent to 'unexpected'). If it is
> > derived from a declared one, it will be sliced.
> Is everyone convinced that propagating the exception into the joining
> thread is the right behavior or even semantically sensible?
I'm convinced that propagating *unexpected* exceptions into the
joining thread is totally wrong and insensible.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk