Re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:53 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:51:17AM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > Yes, I'm aware of the list. My question was what the current behaviour > > > of the various gcc versions is. And if gcc supports the various work > > > around mentiod.

Re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:51:17AM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > Yes, I'm aware of the list. My question was what the current behaviour > > of the various gcc versions is. And if gcc supports the various work > > around mentiod. Like explicity configuring the behavour of the 'catch > > (...)' etc

Re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Andrew Pinski
> Yes, I'm aware of the list. My question was what the current behaviour > of the various gcc versions is. And if gcc supports the various work > around mentiod. Like explicity configuring the behavour of the 'catch > (...)' etc.. There is none yet because there have been no consensus yet. That i

Re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:33 -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please > > > with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is: > > > - in general, > > > - as implemented in the

re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 06:12 -0700, Dan Kegel wrote: > Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please > > with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is: > > - in general, > > - as implemented in the 3.4 series and > >

Re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Andrew Pinski
> > Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please > > with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is: > > - in general, > > - as implemented in the 3.4 series and > > - as implemented in the 4.0 series. > > > > At

re: C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Dan Kegel
Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is: - in general, - as implemented in the 3.4 series and - as implemented in the 4.0 series. At work we're using 3.4 and we hav

C++ vs. pthread_cancel

2005-08-15 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Hi all, On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is: - in general, - as implemented in the 3.4 series and - as implemented in the 4.0 series. At work we're using 3.4 and we have managed to shoot our foot of with