From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-09 17:30:31
David Abrahams wrote:
[...]
> > thrown (or may be something equivalent to 'unexpected'). If it is
> > derived from a declared one, it will be sliced.
>
> Is everyone convinced that propagating the exception into the joining
> thread is the right behavior or even semantically sensible?
I'm convinced that propagating *unexpected* exceptions into the
joining thread is totally wrong and insensible.
regards,
alexander.