Subject: Re: [boost] Release managers: Boost.Thread breaking changes in 1.53
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-01 21:01:49
On Jan 1, 2013, at 6:57 PM, Olaf van der Spek <ml_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Rob Stewart <robertstewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Jan 1, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Olaf van der Spek <ml_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Wouldn't it be simpler to use boost::thread in all cases?
>>> Anyway, conditionally using boost or std::thread does not require these breaking changes, does it?
>> Of course it does. Using one on one platform and the other on another platform is only plausible if they have the same API and behavior unless the client code is changed for each platform, too.
> Don't think that's true. boost::thread could provide a superset of std::thread.
If you focus on just one or two areas, that may be true, but it isn't possible in all cases.
> Does your code depend on terminating in a thread destructor if the thread is joinable? If not, what's the problem with the existing behavior of not terminating, on which other code might be depending?
That's not the only breaking change made or planned.
>> That leaves only four options for Boost:
>> 1. Ignore C++11 compatibility.
> What exactly is your definition of C++11 compatability?
What I meant by that option is to stop, and even reverse, changes making Boost.Thread like C++11 in every possible way. That includes thread destructor behavior, s/unique_future/future/, removing interruption points, etc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk