C++ and posix threads

[David Abrahams]

Richard Henderson <rth at redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 08:46:22PM -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
>> The only detailed proposal thus far has read() returning -1 in the 
>> event of cancellation.
>
> And the proposal is a complete non-starter, because the POSIX C
> binding ALREADY says that synchronous thread cancelation runs the
> handlers set up by pthread_cleanup_push, and then terminates the
> thread.
>
> You'll get zero uptake from library implementors or POSIX if you
> try to change that semantic.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.  The POSIX C binding
standard is in direct conflict with the ISO C++ standard, so _some_
standard will be violated.  Are you suggesting that anything that
violates the POSIX standard is automatically a non-starter, or is it
more subtle than that?  If that's what you're saying, why is it better
to violate the POSIX standard than the ISO C++ standard?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com