Re: [boost] [Thread] Win32 exception handling

Subject: Re: [boost] [Thread] Win32 exception handling
From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-25 15:59:02

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:26 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> on Tue Nov 25 2008, "Emil Dotchevski" <emil-AT-revergestudios.com> wrote:
>> Maybe I'm missing something but what in the upcoming standard requires
>> the catch(...)?
>
> The requirement that terminate() be called when the exception isn't
> otherwise caught.  Of course you can do it with "compiler magic" because
> the standard doesn't specify an implementation.  Practically speaking,
> though, it means a catch(...) in the library.

I don't follow.

It means that no exception should propagate out of the thread
function. In other words, if an exception propagates out of the thread
function, that's a bug. In this case, the call to terminate() is
reasonable. As a bonus, a standard-conforming implementation can also
display a stack trace.

Anyway, automatic catch(...) in boost::thread is not necessary IMO. To
me that's like having an automatic catch(...) in main(). This doesn't
mean that it's always a bad idea, only that the decision to use
catch(...) is outside of the scope of boost::thread.

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode