This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [3.3] Followup to C++ forced unwinding


On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 03:55:06PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> If we don't let "catch (...)" handlers run, we're violating a basic C++
> assumption, with the result that lots of real code will work in a
> single-threaded environment, but suddenly not work in a threaded
> environment.
> 
> If the catch-clause chooses not to rethrow the exception, that just
> means this thread isn't going to be cancelled, which could happen from
> an ordinary pthread cancellation handler.  Deferred cancellation
> semantics don't give you any guarantees about when a thread will exit
> after it has been cancelled.
> 
> Therefore, I'd rather we just treat cancellation like a foreign
> exception.

Ug.  I guess I'll stop what I'm doing, since this directly
affects the code I'm writing.

Um, ok, do we *really* have consensus this time?  Jason, Uli?


r~


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]