From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-12 12:16:04
At Thursday 2002/09/12 06:56, you wrote:
>From: "Eric Woodruff" <Eric.Woodruff_at_[hidden]>
> > Is thread::join () conceptually const? It seems like the kind of operation
> > that shouldn't mutate the thread, simply wait on it.
>It's also responsible for cleanup, but I guess that's not much of an
>argument for non-const usage only.
I find it compelling, unless people want to allow a thread to be join()ed
more than once. In that respect, I consider it almost exactly like
assigning auto_ptr<>s i.e. the source gets altered. This will become
especially important if/when we get return values/exceptions
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A
PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk