Date: 2001-09-25 15:38:48
--- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> I hate to just stand on the sidelines and declare "hear, hear!",
> "hear hear!"
> I also found Peter's arguments quite compelling. This speaks well
> level of discourse we have here.
> I realize that the problems Bill K. has had to face in designing
> library were/are substantial, and there is definitely some value in
> the scope of any problem we try to solve at one time. Maybe we just
> say, "as a first step, we can't expect to come up with ``good''
> easy semantics right away".
> All the same, it is never satisfying to have to lower one's
> we know we can do better in the long run. At boost, however, we are
> volunteers. It behooves us to acknowledge the impressive job Bill
> much of which was the research that allows him to engage with
> debates over the library's design. Part of that acknowledgement, I
> has to be the willingness to pick up the ball at this point. If we
> to server community (2) below, some of us may need to begin the
design of an
> appropriate interface layer.
A big word of warning... such a layer should not be ANYTHING at all
like these primitives. There are just too many pitfalls for new
users to base an interface off of them. This was (and is) the goal
of Boost.Threads. The current library provides us the basis for
development of higher order concepts such as CSP concepts. It
provides the portable layer needed for such higher order concepts,
and has the added benefit of being usable by "experts" (or those
willing to take on the very steep learning curve) for MT programming
with out the higher order concepts. The target audience of this
initial version of Boost.Threads is not for newbies.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk