From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-17 12:23:14
Glenn, and everybody
While I obviously agree with Glenn's sentiment that the sort of post he's
replying to isn't very helpful, as moderator I must insist that inflammatory
material be reworked until it can be posted without the need for
<flame>...</flame> brackets. In fact, I don't think the post was all that
bad, but the word <flame> made it worse.
I don't want to single Glenn out, either. In general, I think the tone of
conversation here has deteriorated a bit in the past few weeks. I want to
remind everyone that we /all/ rely on one another to maintain the highest
professional standards and spirit of collegial respect here, in order to
keep Boost the wonderful thing that it is.
As we begin to discuss topics that matter to more people, everyone will have
more at stake. That can either make the work more engaging and productive,
or we can let our emotions get the better of us and things will go badly.
Please, let's take the extra breaths neccessary to make sure it's the
P.S. Don't make me bring out my big rubber clown mallet!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Knowles" <gknowles_at_[hidden]>
> I didn't the quote from PTHREADS docs saying that "it has not yet been
> shown" to be very useful. I also don't really find "The right answer is
> awaiting you" very useful. Reading this news group should not be an easter
> egg hunt, an introduction along the lines of "I like the PTHREADS solution
> of this, see this thread for a full description:".
> I apologize if I'm being harsh, but the topic is already difficult enough
> understand and follow as it is.
> If the intent is to enable explicit cancellation points I don't see much
> difference between options 1 and 2. Wouldn't option 1, if needed, probably
> be implemented in terms of the second?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk