Boost logo

Boost :

From: Matt Hurd (matt.hurd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-23 20:11:34

>On 24/08/05, Michael Glassford <glassfordm_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Slawomir Lisznianski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I find the catch(...) clause in the thread_proxy function (thread.cpp)
> > causing more harm than good.
> Does anyone have any comments on this? Support or objections?

I don't think it is cut and dry. It is a case of consistent behaviour
versus implementation defined behaviour. In the past I've found it
suited myself too to get rid of the catch all clause so I'd probably
come down in the get rid of it and leave it implementation defined.
Exception safety across threads is a point of contentious design and
best left to the user to deal with it by specific design I think.



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