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

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-24 11:54:55

Yuval Ronen wrote:

> So I'll try to re-phrase. The point I tried to make is that the
> pthread philosophy would be accepted by the C/C++ standard, but the
> pthread exact syntax doesn't have to. The C/C++ standard can adopt
> a different syntax.

Sure. We seem to agree that we want a C threading standard and a C++ 
threading standard, both based on the pthreads model, compatible with each 
other, supported by Microsoft and the rest of the world.

So what is the best way to get there from where we are now? Do nothing and 
hope that this will eventually happen without our involvement... somehow? Or 
propose and back/support an integrated C/C++ API?