Re: [boost] Re: Comments on the thread library

From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-27 12:41:48

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 williamkempf_at_[hidden] wrote:
willia> This illustrates one of the big reasons why I'm not sure I care for a 
willia> generative design for Boost.Threads.  Acquisition scheduling is 
willia> nearly always going to be defined by the underlying implementation, 
willia> so exposing an interface to specify this is misleading at best.  
willia> You're not going to be able to specify this in a portable manner.  I 
willia> designed the semantics of the Boost.Threads mutex types very 
willia> carefully, taking factors like this into account.

But why punish those platforms that do support acquisition scheduling? It
seems to me that it is acceptable for Boost.Threads to support more things
on some platforms and less on others. We just have to carefully document
what is supported where, so users can know what kind of portability to
expect.

Cheers,
Jeremy

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jeremy Siek                        www: http://www.lsc.nd.edu/~jsiek/
 Ph.D. Candidate                  email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
 Univ. of Notre Dame         work phone: [phone]
----------------------------------------------------------------------