Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

6
  • It depends what you want to achieve, but if you just want control over what happens on the way down: learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/cpp/… Commented Apr 24, 2024 at 11:02
  • 7
    But the most fundamental question: once you've caught the exception, what are you going to do with it? Commented Apr 24, 2024 at 11:02
  • It seems like your threads are wrapped within objects of some sort, exposing a make method. If so, take a look at the futures / promise API, these catch the exceptions and contain them within the local state of the thread, and later exposes them as properties in the futures/promise object. This allows the callers to be aware of the failure without crashing the application. You can implement something similar, or rearrange your code based on futures / promises. Commented Apr 24, 2024 at 12:36
  • 1
    Can you edit your question to include more information about the architecture of our application? Are your threads wrapped in their own objects? Are they just pointers to a function? Commented Apr 24, 2024 at 18:26
  • 1
    I think you can provide a better view of the system if you do this trick: capture a bunch of stack traces, each one from a different worker thread. See where the stack traces diverge from VxWorks (the framework) into your proprietary code. The proprietary code is where you have control over, and I suspect there's a single entry point that's used by all message handler threads (typically known as the thread entry point). With this information you can ask for permission to add the exception handler there. Commented Apr 29, 2024 at 14:06