Re: Synchronous method in asynchronous signal callback

Thiago Macieira <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.freedesktop.dbus
Message-ID <1512255.cqeFBynFun@tjmaciei-mobl4>
On Wednesday 27 May 2015 10:12:40 Havoc Pennington wrote:
> GLib's "do not handle OOM" policy is correct for the 99% case. Many
> who believe they should be handling OOM are probably wrong. And of
> those who should be, many are probably making a token effort that's
> broken in practice.

You should have seen the reaction in the C++ committee discussion mailing list 
when we said that handling OOM was pointless... (in moderately complex 
applications running on modern operating systems, I didn't generalise).
-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.