From: Dale Peakall (dale.peakall_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-12 10:25:17
On Monday 12 August 2002 3:39 pm, you wrote:
> From: "William Kempf" <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> > This would, indeed, be a useful higher level construct. I'd point out
> > that creating a thread on demand here would likely be a poor choice.
> A good implementation can transparently use a thread pool to provide
> "instant" thread creation, _if_ creating a thread is a common performance
> bottleneck based on users' reports.
Come on, it's going to entirely depend on an individual application as to
whether a thread-pool is appropriate.
I do not believe that a *good implementation* should ever do this. MT
programs are fidly little beasts and trying to do things like this
transparently in the library is just inviting disaster. The program writer
needs to know what threads exist in the system and what they're doing so they
can ensure that the interactions provide the intended behaviour, do not
dead-lock, live-lock etc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk