Re: Boost.Threads - thread_desc concept

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-06-30 22:48:57

--- In boost_at_y..., Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_a...> wrote:
> At 11:41 AM 6/30/2001, Jeremy Siek wrote:
> 
>  >On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Peter Dimov wrote:
>  >> Creation on the heap is orders of magnitude more expensive than 
> managing
>  >a
>  >> reference count.
>  >>
>  >> This is the major problem I see with a noncopyable design. 
[This is not
>  >> limited to the current discussion, but applies in general.] The 
design
>  >> forces the user to use 'new,' a keyword that has no place in 
user land.
>  >
>  >I agree strongly with this. The design should not force the user 
to call
>  >'new'. I'd much rather see a copyable thread_id type.
> 
> I've also come around to that view.  We may now all be arguing 
violently 
> about something we all agree on.

Well, I don't agree with it ;).  However, it seems like I've become a 
minority of one, and since my own initial design used ref-counting...

I'll stop arguing now.  Give me a few days and I'll have an 
implementation using thread::ref.

Bill Kempf