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

[Dave Butenhof]

Ross Smith wrote:

>On Tuesday 13 January 2004 05:31, Dave Butenhof wrote:
>  
>
>>While I wouldn't dispute the statement that "I don't really
>>understand C++", I absolutely do understand objects, encapsulation,
>>modularity, exceptions, cancellation, and resource ownership; and
>>what you're saying seems essentially "obvious and self-evident". I
>>never argued, or suggested, or assumed, that exceptions would
>>propagate out of destructors.
>>    
>>
>You may not have said so explicitly, but your repeated statements that 
>catch-all-and-discard was almost always a bad idea certainly implied 
>that. If you meant it to be qualified with "except in destructors", 
>which I gather from the above is what you really meant, then I wish 
>you'd said so instead of leaving us to get the wrong impression.
>  
>
Not to beat a dead horse (bash! take THAT, dobbins), but as we've 
already established I am not a "heart and soul" C++ person. I'm really 
in essence talking about CANCEL exceptions, in C/POSIX, and trying to 
relate them to C++ syntax and semantics. And while I have never 
overlooked destructors, they simply are not always floating around on 
the top of my mind and the tip of my tongue. ;-)

>>I suspect that destructors should be implicitly "no cancel zones".
>>    
>>
>Thank you. We now appear to be in agreement :-)
>  
>
Well, that's good.

-- 
/--------------------[ 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 ]---/