Re: [c++-pthreads] Re: FW: RE: Re: I'm Lost

[David Abrahams <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Meredith, Alisdair" <Alisdair.Meredith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

"Meredith, Alisdair" <Alisdair.Meredith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> David Abrahams [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
>> Subject to cancelability.  In C++ "cancelability" would indicate
>> whether cancellation points can throw (these asynchronously-initiated
>> exceptions).  
>
> Sorry to jump into the middle of a good dialog with what might seem an
> irrelevance, but how will these asynchronous exceptions (now being
> re-thrown 'as sychronous') 

Dave B: This is why I didn't want the term asynchronous in the
discussion.  It's just a confusing distraction.

Alisdair M: there are absolutely no asynchronous exceptions here,
period.

> interact with exception specifications?
>
> Badly is my only guess.

Answer 1:  who cares?

Answer 2:  just the same as they interact with any other exception
           (i.e. no worse).

> Not that this should interfere with finding a good model for
> asynchronous exceptions or cancellations - far more useful to your
> general user! But it might mean we put some more thought into
> cleaning up exception specifications in C++0x, so that no problems
> arise.
>
> Unless, of course, I am imagining a problem that does not exist - would
> not be the first time.

I think this is one of those imaginary problems.  It doesn't introduce
any new problems; we're just talking about more ordinary exceptions,
and inasmuch as you know where other kinds of exceptions can be
thrown, the same would be true of these.

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