Re: Boost.Threads - thread_desc concept

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-07-02 14:30:16

--- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> From: <williamkempf_at_h...>
> 
> > No, I don't think it illustrates that at all.  At best it 
illustrates
> > that Boost.Threads should have a thread_group concept to insure
> > other's don't make this mistake in their own implementations.
> 
> So to avoid providing a thread::ref (a custom smart pointer) you're 
going to
> provide a custom container instead - a higher level component.

Yes.  It's more efficient.  The ref-counted concept still exists, so 
this is a smarter design.  It's in line with current C++ design 
(iostreams), it's efficient, and it's flexible when used with other 
concepts.

> > It does not argue for a ref-counted design in any way.
> 
> What would?

Either a usage pattern that's not possible with the noncopyable 
design or evidence that performance is not going to be impacted by 
ref-counting.  Again, look at this from the design criteria of the 
C++ language.  You should pay for only what you use.

Bill Kempf