Browse thread
Has the thread cancellation problem evolved ?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Brian Hurt <bhurt@j...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Has the thread cancellation problem evolved ? |
Gordon Henriksen wrote: > > Such problems are too common to ignore. .NET defuses them by treating > ThreadAbortException specially. > > “When a call is made to the Abort method to destroy a thread, the > common language runtime throws a ThreadAbortException. > ThreadAbortException is a special exception that can be caught, but > it will automatically be raised again at the end of the catch block. > When this exception is raised, the runtime executes all the finally > blocks before ending the thread. Since the thread can do an unbounded > computation in the finally blocks, or call Thread.ResetAbort to > cancel the abort, there is no guarantee that the thread will ever end.” > > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ > system.threading.threadabortexception.aspx So what happens if I throw an infinite loop into an exception handler? Brian