Re: [boost] Re: boost.threads

From: John Max Skaller (skaller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-10 19:32:58

Beman Dawes wrote:

>  >      Shared memory is expensive, local memory is cheap.
>  >If threads can run with the stack on 'on board' memory which is on a
>  >separate
>  >high speed per CPU bus from main memory, they might run considerably
>  >faster: such memory can be cached without being flushed, since only
>  >one CPU can access it.
>  >
>  >      Sounds like a question for embedded programming people.
> 
> Yes.  But for Boost.Threads, we want to stick closely to the thread
> execution model we think is already supported by virtually all current UNIX
> and Windows compilers.  We aren't trying to break new ground here.  So the
> memory rules for what functions in different threads can access have to
> stay as close as possible to the current rules for what separate functions
> in the same thread can access.

        Agreed.

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller_at_[hidden] 
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
New generation programming language Felix  http://felix.sourceforge.net
Literate Programming tool Interscript     
http://Interscript.sourceforge.net