Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-23 07:40:17

> > Surely there's no need to call wait until the parent asks for the return
> > value: In fact I'd kind of like the library to be similar to
> > Boost.Threads - a child process is an object that can be waited upon,
> > the library would only need to do something "fancy" like installing a
> > signal hander, if the child object's destructor is called, without the
> > object ever being waited upon.
> Consider this:
> int main() {
> child::process mozilla;
> mozilla.spawn("mozilla");
> return 0;
> };
> You're suggestion, that child::process::~process() invokes wait() means
> that this program will not exit until mozilla exits. That doesn't seem
> reasonable here. Even less so if the function launching mozilla was in a
> control loop...

I didn't say that (well I hope I didn't), I'm saying that if there has been
no explicit wait then the destructor has to take care of cleanup (as far as
is possible in such a case), it should *not* wait as you rightly point out.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at