At 02:53 PM 1/10/2003, Beman Dawes wrote: >... > >Some platforms are so limited they fall outside the standard's "hosted" category, and >we don't have to worry about them. > >Some platforms are fully featured, so again no worries. > >What you are worrying about seems to me to be platforms which might possibly support >threads-lite, but not a full Boost.Threads implementation. One solution is to just >say no. Another is to require the implementor simulate the missing features. >Implementors should make their own call on that, based on their understanding of >their market. > >There is some chance you might talk me into accepting two flavors of threading for >the Standard - full threads and threads-lite in effect.
For what's it's worth, at work we have implemented complete Java thread support in our VM despite having to run in a single-threaded environment. We had to fake everything with cooroutines. But then again, I would be happy to have a simple coroutine facility in the standard, whether as a subset of the thread facility or seperately, as cooroutines are much simpler to implement and to program with. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
