Re: [boost] Next revision of boost::thread

[Beman Dawes]

At 03:03 PM 1/8/2003, William E. Kempf wrote:

>The sched_fifo, sched_rr, sched_other, scope_process, and scope_system
>values are implementation defined, and on POSIX correspond to SCHED_FIFO,
>SCHED_RR, SCHED_OTHER, PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS and PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM
>respectively.

Do these values apply reasonably well to Windows?

>
>thread::cancel() indicates that the thread of execution should throw
>thread_cancel at the next call to a "cancellation point".
>
>thread::test_cancel() is a "cancellation point" and will throw
>thread_cancel if thread::cancel() has been called on the current thread
>of execution.
>
>thread::sleep() and thread::yield() have not changed, except they are now
>considered "cancellation points" and may throw thread_cancel.

Are there other cancellation points?

Is there a way to force preemptive cancellation?

Given that there has been a great deal of concern about cancellation, I'd like to see a fuller explanation of the cancellation model you are using. Also a simple example or two.

Thanks for working on this stuff! Trying to abstract away different O/S API's is no fun I'm sure.

--Beman


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost