Re: catch(...) and forced unwind

[David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting dot com>]

Matt Austern <austern@apple.com> writes:

> My guess is that we aren't going to make progress on this issue on
> this list, mainly because it's a C++/POSIX issue and not a gcc issue.
>
> I suggest that we set up a mailing list to discuss what a C++ binding
> to pthreads should look like (or perhaps, more generally, a C++
> binding to POSIX).  My guess is that most of the people in the CC list
> would be interested in that question, and probably a few other people
> as well.  I'd certainly want to include David Butenhof in the
> discussion, and my experience is the same as Dave Abrahams's: he's
> very willing to discuss the implication of pthread design issues for
> C++.
>
> The goal of this discussion should be to get POSIX/C++ issues into one
> or both of the relevant standards.  Gcc and glibc and libstdc++ don't
> have to wait until the standardization effort is officially complete,
> of course, but it would be nice to get an idea of the direction before
> we go off implementing things.

There has been a resurgence of interest in the Boost.Threads library
on the Boost list as well; I think you'll find some people there who
are interested in this discussion.

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