Re: [boost] Thread Synchronization (Was Re: Sockets vs. net connection)

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-03 11:31:27

At 03:49 PM 1/3/2001 +0000, William Kempf wrote:

 >The Boost Thread Library (final name?) is very much a work in
 >progress.  Things slowed down in the last few months because of the
 >holidays and other pressing matters, but I'll be stoking the fires
 >again real soon.
 >
 >You comments about needing thread safety brings up a topic for
 >discussion, however.  Early in the development we talked about there
 >being a need for synchronization primitives even before we include
 >portable thread support.  We're basically close enough now to focus
 >on porting such primitives to various platforms and submitting an
 >initial version of the library to Boost.  My focus had moved on to
 >TLS and thread support rather than on finishing the synchronization
 >primitives, but maybe we should consider doing just this.  Any
 >thoughts from others on this?

Rather than waiting for a single perfect library, would it move things 
along faster if you separated the architecture into two or three sections 
(or levels, if that makes more sense), and then finalized a submission for 
the most basic?

Aside from technical issues, that would give the impression of progress 
with the attendant social engineering benefits.

--Beman