From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-02 14:43:33
From: Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> The suggestions to add features (via generative programming or otherwise)
> make me very nervous.
> Multi-threading is notoriously difficult to get right. The experts as far
> back as Dijkstra, Hoare, and Brinch Hansen have argued time and time again
> for minimalist approaches to concurrent programming.
> Keep examples like std::basic_string<> in mind. It tried to make all users
> happy, even though needs and wants varied a great deal. The result was
> general unhappiness.
> Keep Boost.Threads simple. Don't try to solve every multi-threading
> problem the first release. It just isn't the right library to use as an
> experiment in new techniques like generative programming. Or to load up
> with features for everyone. Just my opinion, of course.
I hate to argue against K.I.S.S., and I don't have an opinion
on whether or not a mutex generator is the way to go, but it
does seem that we have already decided against the Hoare/Hansen
approach of a minimal language extension in favor of a set of
I'll also point out that one can first develop a set of classes
and later devise a generator for that set, so we may not need to
choose right away.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk