Re: [boost] Re: Review: Boost.Threads

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-09 20:30:08

At 08:40 PM 9/9/2001, williamkempf_at_[hidden] wrote:

 >> The thread subdirectory is inconsistent with the lack of a general
 >> thread subnamespace.
 >
 >It's what was suggested by several folks, though.  This sort of issue
 >is one I don't care one way or another about.

We really don't have a good rule-of-thumb yet.  We keep getting libraries 
where people want the headers in a sub-directory, but don't want the 
library in a sub-namespace.

Boost.Threads introduces relatively few names, and except for "condition" 
most don't seem likely to cause clashes.  Thus to me there isn't enough 
advantage to offset the (admittedly small) added complexity of a 
sub-namespace.

 >> There is room for improvement in organizing the documentation to
 >steer
 >> the end user right away towards the documentation that he is most
 >likely
 >> to find helpful, bearing in mind that he is likely to take a top-
 >down
 >> approach in getting a handle on the library.  Unfortunately, I don't
 >> have any specific suggestions in this regard; only that perhaps the
 >> thread creation and mutex classes should tend toward the top of the
 >> opening page.
 >
 >I think the concepts are more important than the reference of the
 >actual types.  What is needed that will help with what you're saying
 >here is a high level tutorial.  I expect to add one at some point.

Bill and I have been talking off-line about adding an "Overview" or similar 
page to be read first.  That may address some of Ed's concern above, as 
well as a couple of points from Peter Dimov.

--Beman