[boost] Re: Semaphores?

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-24 10:59:41

David Abrahams wrote:
> 
> To make this post more than just list pollution, 
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Is this your 'IMHO' or rather *THE DWA-MODERATOR'S VERDICT*?

> you could add a short note
> which says something like "this has all been discussed before, and if you
> look at the history you'll find that semaphores aren't really better...[or
> whatever the conclusion was]".

Y'know, I really prefer to let folks do their own "conclusions",
*themselves*, I mean. I always try {at the 'beginning', at least}
to restrict the amount of my interference into their processes of 
doing it by simply posting a link/quote or two (well, sometimes 
more than TWO, and, quite often, with some 'challenging'-short-
comment/annotation), which, as I think/hope could help them to 
come to THEIR conclusions (which perhaps could even differ 
*radically* from my own conclusions -- 'who knows'). Some extra 
amount mental activity/energy spent absorbing the stuff should 
NOT really hurt anyone, I think. And, of course, one could always 
just ignore it on the grounds of 'way too implicit'/'unclear'/
I-just-hate-<NOT>annotated-links/pure-google/etc.! ;-) ;-)

regards,
alexander.