Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-08 20:37:23


At 03:03 PM 1/8/2003, William E. Kempf wrote:

>The sched_fifo, sched_rr, sched_other, scope_process, and scope_system
>values are implementation defined, and on POSIX correspond to SCHED_FIFO,

>SCHED_RR, SCHED_OTHER, PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS and PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM
>respectively.

Do these values apply reasonably well to Windows?

>
>thread::cancel() indicates that the thread of execution should throw
>thread_cancel at the next call to a "cancellation point".
>
>thread::test_cancel() is a "cancellation point" and will throw
>thread_cancel if thread::cancel() has been called on the current thread
>of execution.
>
>thread::sleep() and thread::yield() have not changed, except they are now

>considered "cancellation points" and may throw thread_cancel.

Are there other cancellation points?

Is there a way to force preemptive cancellation?

Given that there has been a great deal of concern about cancellation, I'd
like to see a fuller explanation of the cancellation model you are using.
Also a simple example or two.

Thanks for working on this stuff! Trying to abstract away different O/S
API's is no fun I'm sure.

--Beman


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk