[boost] Re: Next revision of boost::thread

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-11 11:52:11

"William E. Kempf" wrote:
[...]
> > There is some chance you might talk me into accepting two flavors of
> > threading for the Standard - full threads and threads-lite in effect.
> > But picking and choosing between four or five optional thread features
> > leaves me cold.
> 
> I can understand that, but my hands are somewhat tied by POSIX, whose 
> standards bodies took the opposite stance on this issue.

It seems to me that you're missing the purpose/role of The Single UNIX 
Specification and various "Product Standards" within the UNIX branding/
certification program of The Open Group consortium: e.g. UNIX 95, UNIX 
98 Workstation, UNIX 98 Server, etc.].

Well, < note that this is rather old SUSv2-stuff. The current version 
is SUSv3[/TC1](*) >

http://www.unix-systems.org/version2/whatsnew/threadspaper.pdf
(Threads and the Single UNIX(R) Specification, Version 2)

<quote>

For conformance to the Single UNIX Specification, Version 2, the 
threads options are split so that non-realtime functionality is 
mandatory, and realtime functionality is grouped into a single 
option: the Realtime Threads Feature Group.

</quote>

regards,
alexander.

(*) http://www.unix-systems.org
    http://www.opengroup.org/austin