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

From: David Bergman (davidb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-11 19:21:50

Bill,

That was very flexible of you: "I refuse to ..." ;-)

I hope you see Eric's point that the "single thread" rules, (inherited
from the C main entry convention) regarding C++ and main, are not
automatically applicable to the MT C++ we are dealing with.

You surely must appreciate the fact that we leave the safe world of C++
when we add this, OS-specific, thread dimension, i.e., we are not
dealing with the original semantics of C++, as defined in those 700+
pages...

This does not mean that we should not follow that intention as closely
as possible, but we should have the right to question certain implicit
mappings of terms made here, or?

I truly hope that this forum will be open for diverse interpretations of
how the C++ standard should be applied to MT C++, at least till such a
standard emerges (in, say, six years).

/David

-----Original Message-----
From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of William Kempf
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2002 7:49 PM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Re: Re: Threads & Exceptions

>From: "Eric Woodruff" <Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden]>
>
>It's such an vacuous technicality to base anything on not being able to

>call
>main. You imply that
>1) C++ provides extra functionality for functions that the end user is
>allowed to define but not legally allowed to call

Doesn't provide, but certainly allows.

>2) this functionality was likely inherited from C
>3) main is one of these special functions

I don't follow what your point is in all of this.

>I don't think so.

What don't you think?

>The only thing demonstrated by your statement is that the C++ language
>likely suspects main as the only entry point, but it has already been
said
>over and over that C++ is not inherently multi-threaded.

C++ doesn't "suspect main as the only entry point" it MANDATES that.
Again, 
I don't understand what point you're trying to make.

>It's just one more reason why main () should be hidden from the
developer 
>in
>multi-threaded C++ because it introduces a duality that causes the
issues
>you've graciously pointed out.

I don't follow.  I see no duality here, nor any problem caused by MT 
extensions in C++.  And I certainly will continue to object (strongly)
to 
replacing main() as the entry.  As others have pointed out, this is
already 
required by many _application_ frameworks (where the library issue
doesn't 
matter), including the Boost.Test stuff that's used for testing 
Boost.Threads.  Sorry, I refuse to supplant main() in Boost.Threads.

Bill Kempf
williamkempf_at_[hidden]

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

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