"E. Gladyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --- Bohdan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Because :
> > 1. traits causes more complicated and more
> > error prone interface. In this case
> > errors can
> > be caused by two incompatible thread
> > mechanicms used in one application.
> > BTW, have you any idea how two diffrent
> > thread models will collaborate in one
> > application ? And why you may want this
> > mess ?
>
> They won't collaborate, you'll get a compile-time
> error, if you try. I don't think anybody requested a
> collaboration.
>
> > 2. A lot of implementation code will be
> > placed in headers,
> > which damages compile perfomance VERY
> > MUCH ... I hope you have already agreed
> > to this point. Do you ?
>
> Have you looked at my solution? It doesn't have
> compile performance problems for users.
If you mean your threads snipped: Yes i've seen it.
IMO it is more complicated and YES it has compile
time problems, unless you put traits implementation
in cpp files and move #include <OS headers> to
cpp files, but in this case you have
link-to-correct-library problems again.
>
> > 3. I haven't seen compiled application,
> > which is working with TWO OSes
> > or threading models at the same time.
> > Do you ?
> > Single/multi treaded is property
> > of whole application, but not of it's
> > part.
> > Current boost::thread design is just
> > reflection for this statement.
>
> Win32 already has two threading models that can be
> used in one app at the same time.
Same "models" can be used by boost::threads :
1. use threads.
2. don't use them
> They have put them there for a reason.
> I have seen applications that are
> using the both threading models.
Let me guess ... part of application is using threads
and part is woring as always in main thread ?
"Models" term was wrong, sorry.
Under models i meant REALLY diffrent functionality
for threads. Like ToyOSThreads and Win32threads.
More correct is "Thread Implementation".
>
> Sorry but it doesn't seem that you are making any
> effort at all to try to understand what I am
> proposing. Have you seen my proposal? Does it have
> any technical/peformance problems?
I'm still trying. Hope you too.
regards,
bohdan
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
