[boost] Platform splits Re: [thread] Roadmap

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-01 12:48:52

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

> Anthony Williams wrote:
>> Roland Schwarz <roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>> Anthony Williams wrote:
>>>> That was when the goal was a simple reimplementation under the BSL.
>>>> Now Bill's code is under the BSL, the goalposts have moved to
>>>> focusing on a potential interface for the new standard. Are you in
>>>> agreement that this is a worthwhile goal?
>>>
>>> Well, yes in principle, but what about the ongoing platform split?
>>> It is not finished yet.
>>
>> We likely need a platform split whatever interface we go with, since
>> pthreads is quite different at the API level to Windows, even if the
>> same facilities are on offer.
>
> There is also the option of implementing pthread_rwlock_* on Windows, 
> keeping the higher layer platform-independent. 

Which still requires a windows-specific layer, and thus a platform split.

> This obviously requires a higher layer that agrees with the pthread_rwlock_*
> interface.

Which means no upgradeable locks, if nothing else.

The platform split issue is wider than just rwlocks, though.

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