Re: [Boost-users] Any update on a form of boost::threads getting into the C++ 0x standard?

From: Tim St. Clair (timothysc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-26 13:27:59

I agree w/Graham & Lothar, and it seems rather silly to stifle C++0x on such
a debate.

I understand the reasoning behind it, but at the same time one must also
weigh the costs of being pedandtic about such things.  What if C++0x *did
not* have thread support, because the committee could not agree on some
ideas?  From my perspective, I think that would be a bad decision.

On 7/25/07, Lothar Werzinger <lothar_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 25 July 2007 13:07, Graham Reitz wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply Howard.  It is much appreciated.
> >
> > I know this a little out of boost scope, but since I have your
> attention:
> >
> > I don't know if the other members of the standards committee read this
> > forum, but C++ threads is too important, for something like cancellation
> > disagreements, to prevent it from becoming a C++ standard.
> >
> > >From an academic language perspective, how a thread cancellation
> proceeds
> >
> > might be important.  But for engineers, who are used to using libraries
> > that 'are good enough', we find a way to make things work, elegant or
> not.
> > Personally, I would take any of the proposed solutions if the
> alternative
> > was no C++ thread support.
> >
> > Herb Sutter, at this years SD West Conference, spent a session talking
> > about the future importance multi threaded applications, especially with
> > the rise of multi-core cpus.  The memory hole is getter bigger and the
> > expectation is that cpus with numerous cores will be the plug.   Based
> on
> > this assumption, any language that expects to remain the future systems
> > language must have thread support.
> >
> > (Committee members) Please find a way to compromise and push this
> through.
> >
> > Thanks again,
> >
> > Graham
>
> I happen to agree with Graham, it's fundamentally important that threads
> are
> going to be part of C++0x.
> It's good enough to say that the definition of some parts of threading
> (like
> cancellation) are delayed for TR2 than not having threading in C++0x.
>
>
> Lothar
> --
> Lothar Werzinger Dipl.-Ing. Univ.
> framework & platform architect
> Tradescape Inc.
> 111 West St. John Street, Suite 200
> San Jose, Ca 95113
> email: lothar_at_[hidden]
> web: http://www.tradescape.biz
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>