Re: [boost] [thread] Can't use boost/thread/mutex.hpp without boost_system

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] Can't use boost/thread/mutex.hpp without boost_system
From: Artyom Beilis (artyomtnk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-22 06:10:04

> From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
> Le 19/01/12 13:12, Artyom Beilis a écrit :
>>>  From: Anthony Williams<anthony.ajw_at_[hidden]>
>>>  On 18/01/12 14:01, Vicente Botet wrote:
>>>>    I was not aware that Boost.Thread was working as a header only 
> library.
>>>  This was a much-requested feature, so I made sure that boost::mutex at 
> least was
>>>  usable header-only.
>>> 
> Oh, I remember that now.
>>  So would this be fixed or I should switch to lightweight mutex?
>> 
>> 
> As far as Boost.System is not-header-only we can not have both: 
> boost::mutex header-only and compliant with c++11.
> As said before, I could let the user the possibility to set Boost.Thread 
> to don't use Boost.System via BOOST_THREAD_DONT_USE_SYSTEM. Artyom, 
> Anthony is this satisfactory for you?
> 
> Best,
> Vicente
> 
> 


Actually I don't really like using macro BOOST_THREAD_DONT_USE_SYSTEM,
unless the boost-thread with and without it are **binary-compatible**.

If it can't be done I'd rather prefer that Boost.Thread would require
explicit linking.

There is already too much problems with Boost ABI. Consider one
part of library included <boost/thread/mutex.hpp> with 
BOOST_THREAD_DONT_USE_SYSTEM and some other without and linked
with boost_thread. If this macro makes code binary incompatible
it is bad and I don't think it should be used.

There are enough problems with Boost API as it is and I don't
think we would add more.

In this case making lightweight mutexas part of public boost
interface would be much better.


I don't really care about linking with other library I just
wanted to be consistent in my code. That's it.

 
Artyom Beilis
--------------
CppCMS - C++ Web Framework:   http://cppcms.sf.net/ 

CppDB - C++ SQL Connectivity: http://cppcms.sf.net/sql/cppdb/>