Re: [boost] [UUID] Still alive?

Subject: Re: [boost] [UUID] Still alive?
From: Andy Tompkins (atompkins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-20 22:23:56

Hi,

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 04:35:44 +0200, "Manuel Fiorelli"
<manuel.fiorelli_at_[hidden]> said:
> According to the documentation, UUIDs can be constructed either from a
> string or a byte array. In my opinion the term "byte array" could lead
> to misinterpretation since, in my understanding, the constructor
> expects a sequence of characters representing the HEX digits not a
> sequence of bytes: indeed, the sequence has 32 elements (32x4=128) and
> not 16 (16x8=128).

This is a typo in the docs.  The array of bytes needs to have a size at
least 16, not 32.

>
> Also, when you state that every function is thread-safe, do you mean
> that several threads can work simultaneously on different instances? I
> am not sure if this is thread-safety or reentrancy.
>
> I know that there isn't an universally accepted definition, but at
> lest there should be one accepted by all Boost developers.
>
> I saw that in the documentation of an older version of Boost.Thread
> there was a glossary <
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_34_0/doc/html/thread.html#thread.glossary>
> where there is the definition of thread-safe program, but it seems
> that the glossary was removed by the newer documentation <
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_36_0/doc/html/thread.html>.
>
> In my opinion there should be, for example in Boost.Thread, a
> definition of terms such as thread-safe, reentrant (class, function),
> so that when an author uses them can add a link to the corresponding
> paragraph in order to avoid misunderstanding.
>
> Best regards,
> Manuel Fiorelli

What I mean is that all classes are as thread-safe as an int.  Any all
free functions are reentrant.  Does this answer your question?

Andy.