RE: [boost] Re: Boost.threads standardization wishlist

From: Kick Damien-DKICK1 (dkick1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-25 09:27:38

bill_kempf [williamkempf_at_[hidden]] wrote:
> --- In boost_at_y..., Kick Damien-DKICK1 <dkick1_at_e...> wrote:
> > bill_kempf [williamkempf_at_h...] wrote:
> > > There will be no requirement for them to support threads.  This
> > > is obviously true in Boost.Threads, and my understanding is that
> > > this is the thinking of the Committee members as well.
> > 
> > But doesn't that weaken the standard?  I mean, if standard C++ is 
> > not the same on every platform <pause> we'll end up with the mess
> > we're currently in with C++ compilers <smile>.
>
> I don't think it weakens the standard. It's no different then the
> myriad "optional" portions of the POSIX standards.  The key is that
> if an XYZ (in our case threading) library is provided it must
> conform to the standard.

One could argue that all of the optional portions of the POSIX
standards weakens the POSIX standards.  Of course, this is something
of a purist position because they are still useful in spite of such
"weaknesses".

--
Damien Kick