Re: [boost] Boost.Threads, N2178, N2184, et al

From: Sohail Somani (s.somani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-19 17:29:45

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Garland
> 
> Sohail Somani wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> >> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Martin Wille
> > 
> >> Why?
> >>
> >> Users of the POSIX API wouldn't want to adjust their existing 
> >> code for 
> >> it. (As a side node, there seems to be significant 
> resistance against 
> >> adding shallow C++ wrappers around POSIX functions in the 
> POSIX C++ 
> >> Binding Study Group List)
> > 
> > Interesting. Why?
> 
> Yeah, I'd call it depressing.

LOL! Well, pthreads is pretty functional and doesn't get in the way too
often... I was pretty much hoping for boost threads + cancellation.