Date: 2001-10-29 00:00:42
--- In boost_at_y..., Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_a...> wrote:
> >if the latter, i can understand why the boost threads library
> >was brought up. if the former, i don't -- that library has
> >to my knowledge yet to appear in a boost release, and has not
> >completed the boost internal process, to the extent that
> >has been formalized.
> Boost.threads has passed formal review and is in the latest
> Bill Kempf was available to present it to the LWG in person.
ah, yes, i now see it is in 1_25 (in fact its test directory takes
more than 1Mbyte by itself...)
it was not however in 1_24.
so it has been in a release for a month.
i've got nothing in particular against bill nor against the
boost thread library -- i don't know either.
i'm just thinking from my general experience that every API
i've ever designed changed considerably by the time i'd
shipped a product or two with it.
the only thing i can think of which is more controversial
and complicated than threading is gui toolkits.
i just can't believe that a few months of "shakeout" time is enough
to understand the implications of any particular threading
> Jeff Garland has a very interesting time and date library close to
> for submission to Boost. He presented in at OOPSLA in Tampa two
> and it generated a lot of interest.
i'm very glad to hear it; i had just looked around a few weeks
ago and hadn't found anything satisfactory.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk