From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-26 17:03:48
Howard Hinnant wrote:
> t.cancel() is the same as t.raise(std::thread_canceled)
But semantics of cancel is different, no?
Cancel is expected to bring the thread down, yes?
Not so raise, it just is sending kind of a signal to the thread.
(The slot being catch clause).
> Beman and Peter have been active in the area of propagating exceptions
> from t back through the join. You are the first (that I know of) to
> suggest the generalized propagation the other way. :-) Do you have
> use cases other than: t.raise(std::thread_canceled)? Any
> implementation strategies?
I implemented a small prototype and used it already in an application.
I was not using exceptions at this time, as throwing the exceptions
I considered not the hard part. I was seeing this syntactic sugar at
that time. More interesting was how to establish the interruptible (or
Al though at that time I implemented it as a strict add on to
boost thread, because I just wanted to experiment with the usability
of the interface. It could be improved a lot I believe if it were
tighter integrated into boost:thread. (I needed to resort to
notify_all internally e.g, where the program logic would only demand
I uploaded it to the vault under a name "alertable thread" if my
memory is not fading...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk