Re: [boost] [boost thread rework] New version uploaded to Boost Vault

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-31 21:47:14

Matt Hurd <matt.hurd_at_[hidden]> writes:

> I tend to agree with David's sentiment.  I'd be happy to start a
> simplification and restructure of the basic primitives.  The code
> should be restructured into platform specific implementations, like
> boost has elsewhere (such as the atomic inc for shared_prt),  as the
> current code I find a little tricky to read.

Please, whatever you can do!  But please do a fresh rewrite.  That
doesn't mean you can't look at the old code; you just have to type new
characters ;-)

> With such a restructure the various platforms could have different
> maintainers to eliminate a bit of the difficulty of trying to support
> such a cross platform library.

Makes sense.

> I could pull together a basic posix-based implementation which could
> be used on win32 with the posix32 lib as well, though a native win32
> should happen as most people would find the posix32 layer
> unacceptable.  Perhaps the current implementation can be refactored to
> do this, but starting from a clean slate so that the work can be
> licensed under the boost license might be best.

Agree.

> Level 0 - basic atomic ops, fencing, thread, mutex (normal, recursive,
> rw), condition - to be replaced and updated with the work happening
> elsewhere by Lea, Boehm etal.  This should also replace the atomic ops
> used by shared_ptr over time.  Should be in a style that suits generic
> programming via a consistent interface which is currently lacking.
>
> Level 1 - futures, threadables, message queues, etc, primitives along
> the direction of Henney's work.
>
> Level 2 - Framework abstractions to architect single process,
> multi-process, multi-computer workflows.  Needs boost::net / comms to
> reach its potential.
>
> Any thoughts?

Not familiar enough with the library internals to comment.

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