Re: Boost.Threads draft library submission

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-03-19 17:59:15

--- In boost_at_y..., Jesse Jones <jejones_at_a...> wrote:
> >For CloseHandle this is very true.  However, this discussion 
started
> >with the checks made for misuse of the lock types (such as multiple
> >lock attempts).  It seems to me that this is still a gray area.  
Some
> >seem to think it should be an exception, others an assertion (with
> >the ability to leave it "on" during release/production builds).
> 
> I'm not sure there is anyone left who wants to assert on multiple 
lock
> attempts. Asserts are only reasonable if you can catch all the 
problems
> during development and QA. But problems due to race conditions seem 
to veer
> into runtime error territory.

I didn't get the feeling that everyone agreed on this count, but if 
they do I feel a lot better :).  For the short term I'll change the 
other error checks to standard C asserts, though I probably won't get 
this done until tomorrow (there will be another upload later tonight 
with other changes, however).  I do think that a configurable 
assertion would be appropriate for Boost libraries in general, but I 
don't want to tackle this idea specifically for Boost.Threads.

Bill Kempf