[boost] Re: Re: [boost.thread] Experimental alternativeTLS implementation

From: Tony Juricic (tonygeek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-04 15:51:09

"Aaron W. LaFramboise"  wrote

> It is my opinion (I am not sure that this is the general opinion) that a
C++
> thread library must provide some mechanism to allow thread-specific
> destructors to be called automatically, in analogue to destructors
> called at the end of a lexical scope, and at the end of a program
execution.

I don't think that intentinally leaked slot has anything to do with not
invoking object destructors??

Anyway, syntactically and sematically thread ptr looks to me more like:
{
    Object* po=new Object();
    ...
    delete po; // still need this in C++, it is not Java
}

than like:
{
    Object o;
     .....
}

but there is nothing wrong with the automatic cleanup, if it is available.
The 'tricks' needed to get it to work with MSVC are not attractive but "if
you don't need t don't use it" argument is strong enough.

Instead of concetrating on what is in there and what already works, I wonder
what other new features will people like to see? For example, I used threads
mostly for network programming and, stated very broadly, would like to see
some additional infrastructure that would make such programs more generic.

Also, lock free and/or wait free containers would be interesting additions.
They are not directly related to threads classes but are interesting for
some high-performance multi-threaded applications.

Tony