From: Mac Murrett (mmurrett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-20 03:27:30
I'm signed up to the list again! Thanks to Bill and Marshall for the
On Jul 19, 2004, at 9:18 PM, Miro Jurisic wrote:
> MPTasks are layered on top of pthreads, so it should be fine to
> replace an
> MPTasks implementation of boost::threads with a pthreads one without
> anyone, except for clients of boost::threads that depend on the
> using MPTasks -- but I don't think that assumption is supported.
The MP task implementation is really only interesting for Carbon and
Mac OS 9-only targets; the pthreads implementation is more efficient
and probably safer under Mac OS X/Mach-O.
> By the way, does the boost::threads API assume that preemptive
> scheduling, or
> would it be possible to use boost::threads as an abstraction over
It was always Bill's thought that the API was portable to cooperative
threads, but I do not believe that this was ever implemented or tested.
Certainly many threaded solutions will not work without preemption,
regardless of the thread library they are built against.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk