Re: [boost] Non-thread-safe thread library (Boost.Function)

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-19 09:18:15

Douglas Gregor <dgregor <at> osl.iu.edu> writes:

> Anthony Williams wrote:
> > Irrespective of any fixes applied to boost.Function, this has been fixed in
> > the trunk --- boost.thread no longer depends on boost.function.
> >   
> It was fixed on the trunk for Boost.Function long ago. It's interesting 
> that the thread library no longer depends on 'function' (at least, for 
> launching threads); I see how the change was done (using virtual 
> functions, which was once the implementation trick used in Function), 
> but I'm curious as to why? Function has some storage optimizations that 
> will tend to make it more efficient that the basic virtual 
> function/templated derived class idiom.

I wanted the interface to match that being proposed for C++0x, which has the
constructor being a template.

I was considering using boost::function in the implementation, but I never got
round to it.

Anthony