From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-01 14:56:48
David Abrahams schrieb:
>Roland Schwarz <roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>and I do not know for sure. I would have suggested to roll
>>out a small test for the currently supported compilers, to see how big
>>the impact would be to regressions. But as you say: "With most of the
>>compilers I use an uncaught exception thrown from a user thread will
>>terminate the application",
>I didn't ever say that.
I have to apologize.
I mixed up the posters. The sentence is attributed to John Maddok:
>I think I'd come down on the other side: this isn't a minor change, it's a
>complete change of semantics and we should be very careful about such a
>change. With most of the compilers I use an uncaught exception thrown from
>a user thread will terminate the application, which may be what you want, or
>it may not: but it sure is drastic! You can always trap uncaught exceptions
>yourself and call abort (or whatever) if that's what you want. The debugger
>I use will also let you trap all thrown exceptions if that's what you want,
>whether they all do that I don't know.
I hope you didn't see this as beeing offensive.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk