Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-17 10:02:18

Anthony Williams <anthony.williamsNOSPAM_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams writes:

> > In any case, I'm inclined to step back and see if there's a better way
> > to accomplish what's being described in this part of the
> > documentation. I don't think accessibility is actually important to
> > what's being said, if you read carefully. My sense is that we want to
> > say something like:
> >
> > If a thread reads or writes the value of an object while another
> > thread is writing the value of that object,
> or after such a write, without an appropriate intervening synchronization
> primitive,

I don't think it's neccessary to say that. In a multithreaded program
you only have the synchronization primitives to control sequencing
between threads, so to the user, the above really means "if there's
any way this can happen".

> You're probably right that this is a better way of describing it.

Thanks. Of course, I've not followed Beman's caution to read the book
before attempting anything ;-)

                    David Abrahams
dave_at_[hidden] *
Building C/C++ Extensions for Python: Dec 9-11, Austin, TX

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at