[boost] C++ Standards Committee Threading papers (was: [threads] Permission given to change to Boost.License)

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-19 11:03:03

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

> What does the Boost community think of
>
> http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2006/n2090.html
> http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2006/n2094.html
> http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2006/n2096.html

I prefer the thread launching API in N2090 to that in N2094, even though N2094
is closer to the existing boost::thread interface. The "futures" part of N2094
seems very akin to N2096, and reasonably sensible.

I like the idea of condition variables being parameterised on the lock type.

call_once is notably absent from all papers.

You've already seen my comments on "convertible shared ownership" (from N2094)
over on the committee reflector, but for everyone else: I think "convertible
shared ownership" is a bad idea, as it raises the potential for deadlocks, and
given exclusive ownership, shared ownership, and upgradable ownership,
"convertible shared ownership" is not required.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams
Software Developer
Just Software Solutions Ltd
http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk