Re: [boost] Re: Comments on the thread library

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-02 13:33:37

At 02:03 PM 4/2/2001, Jeremy Siek wrote:

 >On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Beman Dawes wrote:
 >bdawes>
 >bdawes> Keep examples like std::basic_string<> in mind.  It tried to make 

 >all users
 >bdawes> happy, even though needs and wants varied a great deal.  The 
result
 >was
 >bdawes> general unhappiness.
 >
 >It seems to me that this example shows why we need a generative approach.
 >basic_string couldn't make all users happy because it was just one class.
 >As with string, the needs and wants of mutex users vary a great deal. If
 >we don't have a generative system, we can't meet these varied needs.

We don't have to meet varied needs, particularly right away.  It might be 
better to concentrate on doing a really good job of meeting some subset of 
the varied needs, and then go on later to a larger set.

In any case, we need to have a way to discourage most users from using some 
features.  For example, semaphores are known to be more dangerous than 
alternatives.  How do we direct users away from such features?

--Beman