Boost logo

Boost :

From: Johan Nilsson (r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-15 03:48:27

Sean Huang wrote:
> The thread lib has recently gone through drastic changes. These much
> needed changes are very welcome and I really appreciate Anthony's
> work and efforts. We use boost::thread heavily in our
> mission/performance critical application and the quality and
> stability of the boost::thread code is paramount to us. With the
> recent changes and what happened in that process, I felt that it is
> necessary to raise my concerns to the community. If these concerns
> have already been addressed and managed, I sincerely apologize for
> generating
> this noise and being paranoid.

I'm personally also a bit concerned, not as much for implementation changes
as for possible interface and/or semantic changes. Being an optimist, I
believe that by the time the Boost.Thread library is released as part of an
official Boost release, the implementation should be of sufficient quality.

What I don't want to do, however, is to change my existing client code
because of interface/semantic changes. If there are breaking changes, my
suggestions would be to put the new (or to preserve the old) code in a
separate namespace.

> Specifically, my questions are:
> 1. Do changes in this magnitude warrant a mini-review?

Why not?

> 2. Is it a good idea that the new implementation be reviewed by other
> boost threading experts such as Peter and/or Howard?

If a mini-review would take place, I'd be surprised if they didn't

> Take it to the
> next level, does it make sense to have a peer review process for at
> least significant changes?

No opinions on this one.

/ Johan

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