Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: Ovanes Markarian (om_boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-06 19:31:22

Thanks for your reply. That is really petty, that the standard will be
partially useful :( Is there any chance to get your ideas on handling thread
priorities? Should I may be move this discussion to the std-c++ list?

Many thanks,

On Feb 7, 2008 1:20 AM, Howard Hinnant <hinnant_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Feb 6, 2008, at 2:24 PM, Ovanes Markarian wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I used boost thread library a lot and like it very much. Currently,
> > I was reading the C++ Standerd proposal and saw that a thread (as
> > well as boost::thread) does not have a priority. Which reason was it
> > not to implement the thread priority in boost, and why is it not
> > considered in the upcoming standard? I understand this feature is
> > rarely required, but if someone suddenly needs to start a real-time
> > priority thread he/she will be forced to use a third party lib
> > again. Or is there smth. what I miss?
> I can answer the std::part. I attempted to introduce a fairly
> rudimentary priority system into the std::thread proposal and it ended
> up being sufficiently controversial that I pulled it in order to get
> the std::thread proposal to advance. It is my hope (as a fallback
> position) that the "native_handle" interface will allow one to adjust
> thread priorities, albeit in a non-portable fashion.
> -Howard
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at