From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-13 12:27:29
At 08:47 PM 8/10/2001, John Max Skaller wrote:
>> Once we get a formal review (which I hope to post a schedule for
>> perhaps we can get some language experts from the Core Working Group to
>> help with the abstract machine.
>Although even that is probably premature: we need users to try out
>the library to see how it stands up to a wide variety of stresses
>to gain confidence that the model serves well. Note that the
>next C++ Standard is still some way away, so we have time
>I think to do this right: it's probably the most critical change
>to C++ since Bjarne wrote the ARM.
I've been running under the assumption that if Boost.Threads is accepted,
and if users don't turn up unexpected problems, we might propose it for the
>Please note also that this abstract machine extension cannot be isolated
>to just C++. ISO C also requires threading support in the abstract
I could be wrong, but isn't the C++ abstract machine defined independently
of the C abstract machine?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk