From: Miki Jovanovic (miki_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-05 11:42:09
--- In boost_at_[hidden], jsiek_at_l... wrote:
> With regards to pthreads and a C++ MT API... it might be useful to
> define the C++ API in such a way that pthread pointers could be used
> as C++ thread objects without the need for wrapping them up in a
> class. This is fairly easy to do if the API is defined in terms of
> normal functions instead of members. Just create the appropriate
> overloads for pthread_t* etc.
Am I the only one that thinks encapsulation rule is a sacred one?
Well never mind. People seem to like this. I will agree to this if I
get guarantees that pthreads or any other implementation details are
exposed only as an add-on, and are not required functionality.
Even if we use POSIX or pthreads as a base for our work, it must be
possible to implement the library in terms completely separate from
these API's, hence using pthread_t* will be an error in such a
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk