Re: [boost] Re: Thread Interest Query

From: William E. Kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-13 09:17:16

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan'l Miller" <optikos_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 7:24 AM
Subject: [boost] Re: Thread Interest Query

> > The design of the two libraries is pretty
> > different and I wonder if maybe including options for either would
> > be better than trying to address everything in one library.
>
>   I differ with you there.  I see no reason that there needs to be two
ways of representing a thread in C++0x.  I see no reason that there needs to
be two ways of representing a mutex in C++0x.  There should be one
multithreading library of larger scope than Boost.threads.  For example,
Boost.threads considers interaddress-space synchronization (e.g.,
inter-process semaphores controlling shared memory) as out of bounds.

Strictly and categorically false.  Interaddress-space synchronization has
*ALWAYS* been planned for Boost.Threads, and will exist in the next
revision.  This will be done through an attribute on the Mutex types, the
same as it's done for pthread_mutex_t types.  Don't confuse the hot topic of
semaphores with this topic.

Bill Kempf