Re: [boost] [thread] Do we need thread_group now?

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] Do we need thread_group now?
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-14 20:42:36

Le 14/04/12 22:09, Olaf van der Spek a écrit :
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba
> <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>> I don't know it adding these simple algorithms would be useful to the Boost
>> community if thread_group is deprecated. I could live without them, my main
>> concern is to deprecate thread_group.
>>
>> What do you and others think? Anthony?
> Does Boost have guidelines for deprecation / backwards compatiblity?
> What's the point of deprecating this stuff?
>
>
>
Oh, I forgot to respond to your second question. Very good question.

thread_group was not designed with move semantics in mind, neither with 
shared ownership. Now that we have move semantics in Boost the user can 
do better designs. If thread_group stay there, there will be always 
someone that will request to improve this class while using a specific 
container will provide whatever she needs. Perhaps some algorithms could 
be added to make the user life easier.

In addition, the fact the class is there let think beginners that this 
is the way to go, while using standard containers let them control 
better what they can do. Of course, the documentation could help on this 
without deprecating the feature.

Best,
Vicente