Re: [boost] Attempting resolution of Threads & Exceptions Issue

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-12 11:03:54

From: "Dale Peakall" <dale.peakall_at_[hidden]>
> > > Have the default beviour be for threads to terminate on uncaught
> > > exceptions.
> >
> > This is common between 1/2 & 3. What 3 calls a "thread" 1 calls
> > "thread<void>" and the behavior is as specified above.
>
> Only for thread<void>.

Most definitely, since thread<R> where R != void produces an interface where
join() returns a value, and this is not covered by (3).

> > I think that the "low level library that allows users to do the work"
> > argument must not be overused. If I want a low-level library, I will use
> > pthreads.
>
> You appreciate that using pthreads denies you a large number of advantages
> that can be derived from using boost.threads: Cross-platform
> interoperability, exception safety, a C++ style interface etc.

Pthreads is a standard and is cross-platform. Exception safety? True, but I
can use the Boost synchronization primitives without using boost::thread (if
they work for me; a pthread_mutex is much less safe but it is more
powerful.)

C++ style interface? If the interface is well designed, it doesn't need
"C++" or "OO" labels.

> Boost.Threads is a low-level library, but it's a low-level *C++* library,
> that solves a large number of *C++* problems.

See above. A good design is a good design, with or without the emphasized
C++. If you have specific points, I'll be interested to hear them.