Re: [boost] Future of Boost.Thread part II

From: John Fuller (jfuller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-11 14:29:37

for me, cancellation and suspension would be nice.
In a recent project I ended up using ACE tasks for the activities that
required this functionality.

Additionally, I ended up implementing a descendent of thread group
that mapped names to threads so you could identify threads by name
(so they could be address by a uri, for example).

On Feb 11, 2004, at 12:45 PM, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote:

> At Wednesday 2004-02-11 08:49, you wrote:
>> In the "Future of Boost.Thread" thread, Jeff Garland said:
>>
>> > I believe exception propagation can be a useful model at times,
>>     <snip>
>> > But as I believe I said earlier I hardly believe it is the
>> > most important capability that should be added to Boost threads.
>>
>> In another post he said:
>>
>> > There are lots of other things that boost.threads lacks
>> > when stacked up against more comprehensive solutions
>> > which are probably more important than cross-thread exceptions...
>>
>> In yet another post, Matt Hurd said:
>>
>> > I do need to set thread priorities however.
>> > This is more important to me than cancellation.
>>
>> This leads me to ask, while the interest sparked by the "Future of
>> Boost.Thread" thread is still hot: what are the most important things,
>> in your opinion, that Boost.Thread lacks?
>
> for me?
> 1) priority modification (both absolute and relative)
> 2) return value | exception propagation back to the "joiner"
>
>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
> Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
> The five most dangerous words in the English language:
>               "There oughta be a law"
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>