[boost] Re: Boost::thread feature request: thread priority

From: Maxim Egorushkin (e-maxim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-02 15:51:20

"Alexander Terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:3F0288A6.5524C33_at_web.de...
>
> Maxim Egorushkin wrote:
> >
> > "Alexander Terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:3F01494F.1E88A836_at_web.de...
> > >
> > > Maxim Egorushkin wrote:
> > >
> > > [... "ala Alexandrescu" volatiles ...]
> > >
> > > http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=3EE84807.DD00F4D0%40web.de
> > > http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=3EE861E5.13B60F31%40web.de
> > > (Subject: Re: volatile keyword usage philosophy (long!))
> >
> > Sorry, I failed to figure out the point in that topics.
>
> That's okay.

But I'd love to :). Is the Alexandrescu's idea of using volatile keyword for
designating thread safe member functions somewhat "brain damaged"?