Re: [boost] [thread] thread interruption semantics

From: Martin Bonner (Martin.Bonner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-15 07:52:00

From: Phil Endecott 
> 
> Howard Hinnant wrote:
>> The Posix committee has considerable experience and expertise in this
>> area.  While I do not trust their advice blindly, I also do not
>> dismiss it lightly (quite the contrary).  Transferring mutex
>> ownership among threads is not one of the decisions they have made
>> that I've questioned.  
> 
> You are not the only one to have argued in this thread that the
> status-quo has been arrived at as a result of much deliberation by
> experts whose conclusions we should trust.  
I don't think that's a fair characterization of Howard's argument.  "As
a result of much deliberation by experts whose conclusions we have to
treat seriously even if we eventually discard them" seems much closer to
me.

> While I don't exactly
> disagree with that attitude, I suggest that the level of deference
> might perhaps be dropped back one notch.

>> I do not trust their advice blindly
and 
>> If you have
>> strong motivation for relaxing this restriction, coupled with some
>> insight into the posix decision and why it should be relaxed, I am
>> most interested.
seems to be pretty much the requested drop back one notch.

-- 
Martin Bonner
Senior Software Engineer/Team Leader
PI SHURLOK LTD
Telephone: [phone] / 203894 (direct)
Fax: [phone]
Email: martin.bonner_at_[hidden]
www.pi-shurlok.com
disclaimer