Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-25 10:46:50

Yuval Ronen wrote:

> 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.

Nobody can disagree with that. The problem in our discussion lies with tying
whether one C++ API is better than another with whether the C++ API comes
with a C API in the same proposal. This implies that the second C++ API
contains design compromises purely because it has a C sibling - guilt by
association - without actually stating any.

Another interesting question is whether "the best" C++ interface is
independent of the existence of a standard pthreads API. The answer very
much depends on the perspective of whoever determines what is "best" for
him, of course.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at