Re: [Boost-users] [signals] thread-safe default combiner

From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-09 14:37:49

On Feb 9, 2007, at 12:12 PM, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> I'm noticing now that boost::last_value isn't thread-safe when used  
> with a
> non-void return value, since a thread can't in general be sure the  
> signal
> will have any slots connected to it when it is invoked.  Would it be
> acceptable to make last_value throw an exception on the non-void,  
> no slots
> case?  Throwing an exception seems preferable to the dreaded  
> "undefined
> behaviour".  Or we could use a slightly modified default combiner  
> with a
> different name.

Throwing an exception is a reasonable solution.

        Cheers,
        Doug