Re: I'm Lost

[David Abrahams <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave Butenhof <david.butenhof@xxxxxx> writes:

> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>
>>Wil Evers wrote:
>>[...]
>>  
>>
>>>I'd say it's time to face the truth, which is that POSIX cancellation
>>>semantics are incompatible with commonly established C++ coding
>>>practices.
>>>    
>>>
>> It's incompatible with cancel-unaware C++ code. Note that it's
>> incompatible with cancel-unaware C code as well, but that didn't
>> stop POSIX and ongoing creation of cancel-safe code in both C and
>> C++ languages. Very many tons of cancel-safe code.
>>  
>>
> Indeed. The only real (and unfortunately the hardest) questions are how 
> to reconcile the (apparent) contradictions between cancel scope and C++ 
> throw specs (explicit or implicit as in destructors), and cultural 
> investment in catch(...).

Well, you guys just dove right back into the detail as far as I can
tell.  I guess I'm going to remain lost, but it's probably not a big
loss to the discussion.

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