Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
The best way to circumvent the lack of Thread.kill ?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@b...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The best way to circumvent the lack of Thread.kill ?
David Teller wrote:
>  I would have figured that the best way to properly kill a thread would
> be to have some form of channel (i.e. Events.t)-based communication
> between threads -- and then killing the channel.
>  Trouble is that, as I've just realized, there is no such facility as
> killing/sending an exception through a channel. Does anyone know why ? is a type constructor which takes an argument identifying 
the type of objects that are sent over the channel. You can send thunk 
computations ((unit -> 'a), which may very well raise an 
exception. Or you can simply send an exception (exn 
Finally, you can send "()" on a channel (unit, whose sole 
  purpose is to communicate soft-kill requests.