|
Boost Users : |
From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-26 14:01:07
On Jul 26, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Tim St. Clair wrote:
> 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.
The C++ committee will not ship the C++0x standard without thread
support, period. They'll argue, they'll haggle, but in the end we'll
get *something*.
- Doug
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net