[boost] Re: Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions

From: Eric Woodruff (Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-06 11:33:03

I think it's very clear that C++ has an object and functional model hybrid.
We don't create objects with static methods every time we need to write a
new algorithm function. It's just the way of the language. We are used to
method calls, and functions that are generic of any object type... for some
things. The boost::function approach is the most natural and most generic
solution available without forcing the end user to create extra classes
simply to override "run" -- I think an inheritance approach would detract
from maintainability.

----- Original Message -----
From: Pete Becker
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Sent: Tuesday, 2002:August:06 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions

At 10:38 AM 8/6/2002 -0500, William E. Kempf wrote:
>This design too was considered and rejected.  I think the function object
>design in Boost.Threads is closer to modern C++ design philosophy then the
>artificial inheritance based approach.  If you don't agree I'd appreciate
>hearing why?

There is nothing artificial about this use of inheritance. I'm really not
interested in participating in a discussion that consists of slinging
around loaded terms devoid of technical content.

-- Pete

Dinkumware, Ltd.
"Genuine Software"

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost