From: Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) (SeeWebsiteForEmail_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-26 23:13:37
Beman Dawes wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>Beman Dawes wrote:
>>>The C++ standards committee's Library Working Group has proposed a
>>>schedule for library changes and extensions:
>>> * October 2005: cutoff date for C++0x major library proposals
>>> * October 2006: cutoff date for library TR2 proposals
>>> * April 2007: cutoff date for C++0x library clean-up papers
>>>The usual rule-of-thumb is that new library components go in TR2,
>>>while changes to existing components go in C++0x. The LWG will
>>>consider exceptions to the rule on a case-by-case basis.
>>A threading library is an interesting specimen. Is it a C++0x or a TR2
>>thing? Given that the cutoff dates are a whole year apart...
> Yep, sort of an odd case. Because it is a new component, TR2 would seem the
> logical choice. But with three independent implementations (Boost,
> Dinkumware, and Metrowerks), existing practice is already considerable and
> many LWG members are already familiar with Boost.Threads. The Evolution
> Working Group is apparently also interested in pushing forward with threads
> for C++0x. Hans Boehm and others are working on core language changes to
> legitimize C++ threading and other forms of concurrent programming.
What other forms of concurrent programming?
I also wonder how work on accepting libraries can be done before or
concurrently :o) with language changes that render them legitimate. This
has been a thorny issue for the memory model group. We basically have
decided to finish the memory model first. In face of other threading
libraries being proposed (by the way does any of the three support
lock-free programming?), we might have to obey market laws and start
working on a library as well, because we have a good idea on how it
would look like.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk