[c++-pthreads] C++ and posix threads

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Nathan Myers <ncm at cantrip.org> writes:

| On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 12:56:42AM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Nathan Myers <ncm at cantrip.org> writes:
| > 
| > | On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 03:52:50PM +0100, Jean-Marc Bourguet wrote:
| > | > I feel confused.  I wonder what is the context of the discussion
| > | > and especially the constraints or the liberties we assume from
| > | > an implementation.  
| > | 
| > | This list was started in hope getting guidance for the implementers of 
| > | gcc/glibc in creating a synchronous thread-cancellation binding that is
| > | sensible for C++.
| > 
| > I hope this list was not setup in order to come up with GCC- or
| > GLIBC-centric solutions.  I think that was precisely the opposite, if
| > I understand Matt's original suggestion correctly.
| 
| Of course.  This list is meant to bring in people from outside the gcc 
| list, but it's not POSIX.

Right.

| If we invent a design, and implement and 
| demonstrate it, it's a valuable example for all C++ implementers.  But 

If the purpose was just to come up with an implementation for a
particular compiler/system as a proof of concept, that could have been
done in GCC/GLIBC inner circles without creating this list and
alerting the world about it.  

| if we tie ourselves in knots trying to accommodate every historical 
| mistake and every overconstrained implementation, we we will make no 
| progress and no contribution, and will waste everybody's time besides.  
| 
| It is essential that we stick to the basics: what is essential, and 
| what can we really implement?  It has already been observed that the 
| standards as conceived are incompatible.   We are have no choice but 
| to do something different, and work to standardize that.  (Actually, 
| we do have a choice: we can fail.  Ada has no POSIX cancellation 
| binding.)
| 
| Do you have anything to say about the model that was proposed, or can 
| you propose an alternative?

I'm carefully listening to what other people (and inputs from non-GCC
tied ones are most welcome) to say/propose before legislating about
what is relevant or not, historical mistake or not, essential or not.

-- Gaby