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

From: Yuval Ronen (ronen_yuval_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-25 07:41:24

Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>>> Here is how I understand your question: does it make sense to formalize a
>>> lower level API behind <thread>.
>> You understand correctly. This is the question I ask, and the answer I
>> give is "no".
>>
>>> If we lived in a world where pthreads did not exist, I wouldn't care much
>>> one way or another; but we don't.
>> The fact that pthreads exist is completely irrelevant. We setup a C++
>> standard, and it should be as good as it gets. The POSIX model is good,
>> so we take it. The POSIX syntax is not so good (for C++, obviously) so
>> we don't take it.
> 
> What follows then, is that you would like existing pthread C libraries to 
> continue to be non-portable. I don't see why. I might be blind, but I don't 
> see why would that be desirable.

I never said that. If the C standard committee decides to fully adopt 
pthreads, I'd be fine with it. And if the C++ standard committee decides 
to be backwards compatible with C, and also adopt pthreads, I'd be fine 
with that too. I just don't think it should come instead of "the best" 
C++ interface, which is what I care about most.

> I haven't checked in depth either. But I'm very interested to know the 
> answer.
> 
>>> In particular we need to examine the answer to 2) and 3) wrt the Windows
>>> <thread> implementation, since on Posix the answer is clear.
>> Disagreement again. Question 1 is not to be overlooked at all. The C++
>> moto is "don't pay for what you don't need". I'll add to that "don't
>> standardize what you don't need". Less is more, and stuff like that.
> 
> While strictly speaking I do not *need* to use existing C libraries in my 
> C++ code, I *want* to be able to. And I mean this in general, not just for 
> threading libraries.

Ok, so we come again to what seems to be the true heart of the debate. 
Do we want interoperability between the C library and the C++ library, 
and how much are we willing to pay for it. And it seems we give 
different answers to this question.