From: Kevlin Henney (kevlin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-04 17:08:58
In message <90h384+jmrd_at_[hidden]>, William Kempf <sirwillard_at_my-
>> No, think of a string that's not shared across threads. As I said,
>> are many subtleties to programming with threads and objects, and if
>> are going to share mutable, sequential value types between threads
>> have just fallen into one of them. Sorry, but that's just the way
>Sharing data is a fundamental *need* of MT applications. You even go
>so far as to illustrate this with your next argument here.
Of course MT applications need to share data! Sorry, I think you misread
what I wrote. I wrote:
"If you are going to share mutable, sequential value types..."
And then proceeded how to show how you share data in MT applications by
demonstrating mutable, guarded object types, and discussing the implicit
shareability of immutable objects.
>If you are still unhappy with the threading case, I
>> we drop it and just focus on the one we can agree on.
>That much sounds like a good idea at this point.
Kevlin Henney phone: +44 117 942 2990
Curbralan Limited mobile: +44 7801 073 508
mailto:kevlin_at_[hidden] fax: +44 870 052 2289
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk