RE: Safely implementing Thread.Abort

Hi,

> > > Outputting abort check instructions on every
> backward
> > > branch is OK with me, as long as you only do it
> in
> > > programs that use Thread.Abort.  This can be
> detected
> > > by the loader (any assembly with a MemberRef to
> > > Thread.Abort is a candidate).
> > 
....

Having every backward jump check for thread->aborted
would be a initial "make it work" solution. 

Not to mention that we could have an 
"--expect-no-thread-aborts"  which would
avoid this check ? . for example, when running 
pnetmark ? ;-)

> I pc register is specified explicitly.  Both windows
> and some unixes do
> provide a CONTEXT/signalcontext that will give you
> the values of these
> registers at the time of interrupt.  Is it not
> possible to simply restore
> the appropriate registers and then jump to the right
> place in the new
> abort-aware code?

That would be a GCC + (x86/arm/ppc) specific hack ,
which would still not speed it up on all platforms.

But my question is whether , that much work for
just speeding it up in 3 MAJOR platforms is 
worth the effort ;)

Gopal


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains – Claim yours for only $14.70/year
http://smallbusiness.promotions.yahoo.com/offer