[c++-pthreads] Re: thread-safety definition

[Dave Butenhof]

Wil Evers wrote:

> Dave Butenhof wrote:
>
>> If cancel is implemented completely as a "full stature" C++ 
>> exception, and none of the "exception safe" code does anything silly 
>> like "catch(...)" without a re-throw, then, yes, it's likely to be 
>> reasonably cancel-safe. 
>
> A catch(...) without a re-throw isn't necessarily a silly thing to do, 
> especially in a destructor.  Sometimes, the only alternative is to 
> risk a call to terminate().

But it still breaks cancellation. Again, ignoring cancel entirely may be 
"cancel safe" in some trivial sense, but it's not useful or reasonable 
under nearly all circumstances.

-- 
/--------------------[ David.Butenhof at hp.com ]--------------------\
| Hewlett-Packard Company       Tru64 UNIX & VMS Thread Architect |
|     My book: http://www.awl.com/cseng/titles/0-201-63392-2/     |
\----[ http://homepage.mac.com/dbutenhof/Threads/Threads.html ]---/