Re: threads change

At 11:07 PM +0200 7/17/06, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
>On 14/07/06, Artur Bergman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>  >> If code is running in  a thread or no doesn't mean it
>>>>  should have to act differently.
>>>>
>>>>  I also think exiting from a thread is something that the
>>>>  developer  should be aware of is happening, and that is
>>>>  why it is giving the  warning.
>>>
>>>  That is what started off the whole discussion:  Exiting from
>>>  a thread was NOT issuing a warning.
>>
>>Then that should have been the fix.
>
>I come to think that a better idea wrt exit() is one that was proposed
>during the referred thread:
>let exit() exit the application (like before), and add threads->exit()
>to exit the thread. Opinions?

In light of the discussions again, I think that would make the most 
sense, with one addendum: to have an easy way inside a thread to make 
exit() to a threads->exit() instead.  If you happen to have to use a 
module (over which you have no control) inside a thread that might do 
an exit().  And as the owner of the thread, you don't want it to exit 
the application.

Trying to do this by override CORE::exit is not a option, as you can 
only do this at compile time (as far as I know).

So I would favour in extra, cloned global variable that would be 
checked by CORE::Exit, which would indicate whether to really exit(), 
or do a threads->exit().  And have an easy way to change the (cloned) 
setting of this variable with a threads class method, e.g. 
thread->exit_exits_thread_only;



Liz