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

[Ross Smith <r-smith@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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.

> I suspect that destructors should be implicitly "no cancel zones".

Thank you. We now appear to be in agreement :-)

-- 
Ross Smith ......... r-smith@xxxxxxxxxx ......... Auckland, New Zealand

    "This world is like a burnt steak: small, tough, and the chips
    are always stacked against you." -- Mike