Re: [boost] Re: Semaphores?

From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-24 01:50:51

At Thursday 2002/05/23 11:32, you wrote:

>"William E. Kempf" wrote:
>[...]
> > That said, semaphores aren't strictly "missing forever".  I plan to address
> > this at some point with more research into the pros/cons.
>
>Save your time, Bill. Really.

Any time you want to take a discussion offline I'll be glad to defend 
semaphores at length.
When writing embedded systems they are almost indispensable.  I _know_ 
they're "dangerous", but then, so are a lot of other things; and they're 
leaner, meaner, and faster than any other mechanism.  You _can_ also write 
a rendezvous() (from Ada) with them, you can write a mutex with them.  Try 
writing a semaphore with only those "primatives" in your toolkit.

I trust that Bill _will_ research them.

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A
PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"