> Seems like a paradox: we can't call MPI_Abort from within error(), > because error() can't be sure there isn't some enclosing code waiting > to catch its exception, but we do have to be able to call MPI_Abort > when error() is called if there is no catch waiting.
I like what you propose. At times like these I ask myself WWBD -- what would boost do? They have an MPI interface, and I wonder what they have done. They are all about exception safety etc... I think their MPI interface and underlying reliance on object serialization is not the best fit for us, but there might be some useful ideas to mine nonetheless. -Ben ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
