[c++-pthreads] Re: pthread_cancel and EH: let's try this again

[Ross Smith]

On Wednesday, 13 July 2005 03:39, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> WRT scheme #1, various people have wondered why re-asserting
> cancellation in the exception's destructor is necessary.  It's
> necessary because as I said in my first message, if someone
> specifically told the thread to go away, they don't want it to
> recover, they want it to go away.  The thread doesn't get to
> second-guess that request, it has to go away.  It can take
> arbitrarily long to get around to actually going away, but it can't
> actually decide not to.  It especially can't decide this implicitly,
> as a side-effect of code written to handle exceptions.

I am firmly convinced that attempting to distinguish between 
"arbitrarily long" and "never" is, to put it mildly, fairly pointless.

-- 
Ross Smith ........ r-smith at ihug.co.nz ........ Auckland, New Zealand
  "Plausible rockets are rare. Plausible space travel is rare. Most
  SF authors could not calculate a mass ratio if you put them in a
  sunken pit filled with ravenous sliderules." -- James Nicoll