[gclist] Finalization, again
Thu, 04 Oct 2001 16:26:41 -0400
At 03:38 PM 10/4/2001 -0400, David F. Bacon wrote:
>the other sensible alternative would be to statically require that finalizer
>methods execute no unbounded loops or blocking operations.
Do you know of anyone working seriously on this problem?
It would also make sense in exception handlers; it would
be lovely to be able to assert that a thread would, when
told to go away, actually go away. The fact that this isn't
possible (for, say, Java) limits the contexts in which
you'd actually be willing to download and run code from