From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-06 05:42:23
Momchil Velikov wrote:
> Alexander> What "pthreads cleanup handlers"? Do you mean TSD dtors and/or
> Alexander> thread cancel/exit cleanup handlers? Thread termination (unwinding
> Alexander> of cleanup handlers followed by TSD destruction) and program (aka
> Alexander> process) termination (it runs atexit() handlers and C++ destructors
> Alexander> for objects with static storage duration, if not abnormal) is fully
> Alexander> specified. Or do you mean C++ stuff "on the stack", not static
> Alexander> storage duration?
> I guess yes, he meant auto objects.
I'm not so sure. So, just in case: oviously, thread termination runs
before process termination (on "passive" process exit). But if process
is terminated "actively" then no thread cleanup is done at all.
(my DR that was initially rejected)
(my appeal, part I)
(my appeal, part II)
(DRB's friend of the court brief)
(Preliminary revised verdict)
XSH ERN 41 exit OPEN
This item had been previously rejected but in the light of comments
on the reflector has been revisited. A revised proposal is
in the aardvark reports. This is being left open for further
> IMHO, one can safely assume C++ destructors will be run before
> cleanup handlers.
They should run "interleaved". There shall be only one stack.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk