[boost] Re: [threads] Future directions

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-24 10:29:33

"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Michael Glassford wrote:
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>>> So far there are plans to propose Boost.Threads,
>>
>> Is this something that's already being worked on? I have some ideas
>> that I've been thinking about to improve Boost.Threads, and some
>> other ideas that have been suggested to me (primarily by Roland
>> Schwarz), that I'd like to at least get other people's opinions of
>> before a Boost.Threads proposal goes too far. Some of the ideas
>> come from the big lock-unification discussion that took place on
>> this list some time ago (although I think I've come up with some
>> interesting ideas on that topic that weren't mentioned in that
>> discussion). I have some other ideas as well that I think people
>> might find intereting.
>
> I'm interesting in reworking some areas of Boost.Threads that I find
> lacking, so you should probably announce your plans so that we can
> avoid duplication of efforts.
>
> I'm not sure whether we need to bother, though. The current
> Boost.Threads already seems "fast-tracked" into C++0x, with Beman,
> Howard and Pete Becker behind it.

AFAIK nothing the LWG is doing now other than TR1 and fixing TR1
defects is going to make it into C++0x.

> Major changes probably don't stand a chance. And I'm not very 
> optimistic about any minor changes, either. 

I think it's too early to make that judgement.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com