From: Daniel Krügler (dsp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-06 05:01:53
Bennett, Patrick schrieb:
> Honestly, I'd suggest you just use ACE for threading/synchronization
> primitives. It's available for a large number of platforms and is
> heavily used and frequently updated.
> I like Boost a lot, but I think some people are trying to make Boost
> more than (IMO) it should be. People discussing efficient io dispatch
> techniques for example would be better served to just use ACE, which
> already does many of these things extremely well.
> Just my (possibly unwanted) $.02.
Not unwanted, but critizeable. I honestly think, that boost is the right
place for a Thread Library, because platform independent interfaces for
concurrent programming are one of the most interesting features and many
people ask for its inclusion in the C++ standard.
We do use the current Boost Thread library already (although some
important features are missing) and a successfull crossplatform
implementation via boost would proof the committee that it is realizable.
I know, that this job is very hard due to the problem area itself as
well as due to unresolved questions which interface would do the right
thing. I was so glad, when I heard during the last ACCU in Oxford the
talk of Kevlin Henney concerning an alternative ansatz for such a
thread library and one of my biggest hopes was, that there could be
positive interferences between the current boost interface and that
of Kevlin. I also asked in this news group for such a possibibility,
but got no answer.
Finally I want to congratulate William Kempf and all the other boost
participants for their work in the current Thread library (and the rest
of boost of course) and I hope that it will evolve further on!
Just my 0.02 EURO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk