Re: [boost] Re: Threads: what I wrote...

From: Bonnard.V_at_[hidden]
Date: 2000-08-09 15:30:52

On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 12:48:05PM +0100, Lois Goldthwaite wrote:

> One library vendor advertises that its container classes are 'MT-hot,' meaning
> that every operation is internally synchronized to make multi-threaded
> programming transparent. 

That's anoying as a programming practice, and w.r.t. the choice of words:

I previously defined MT-Hot as ``creating user visible threads'', ex 
the Java GUI. The above is what I previously called ``actively thread 
safe'', or ``strongly thread-safe container'' as I say in

http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/bonnard/NewLibs/Para/MultiThread/doc/MT.html

> I would be very wary of allowing mutexes and other synchronization objects to
> be copied. 

I would find it quite useful (and easy to implement) for the Mutex to have 
the auto_ptr semantic.

In 

http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/bonnard/NewLibs/Para/MultiThread/

I only provide exclusive and shared locks, events, and non-interruptible 
code sections.

-- 
Valentin Bonnard