From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-06 15:03:14
> Since there are already synchronization primitives in Boost.Thread and
> in numerous other Boost libraries which roll their own, would it not be
> efficacious for Boost to develop a separate synchronization primitive
> library which then could be used by all other Boost libraries.
Well, Boost.Thread and Boost.Interprocess aren't the libraries where
this synchronization should go? Or you propose to merge all
synchronization utilities in a new library? I think that Boost.Threads
will have a revision once the C++ committee decides the thread API.
Other libraries use their own synchronization primitives because they
don't want to link an external library or they don't want to have
dependencies. The first reason can be solved with a header only
implementation of Boost.Thread utilities, but the second reason will
always be there, I'm afraid. Anyway, I think that all Boost libraries
should try to use already developed Boost components, and if those don't
fill the requirements, request changes. A header-only thread library
can be one of such requests.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk