Re: Threading in new C++ standard
On 2008-04-25 10:33, Szabolcs Ferenczi wrote:
On Apr 24, 7:05 pm, Pete Becker <p...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
On 2008-04-24 12:37:40 -0400, Szabolcs Ferenczi
I remember having seen a number of arguments that day going that the
library solution is not adequate (with reference to the paper of
Boehm) and that C++0x goes for a language-based approach instead.
That's not correct, as several people have told you.
Several people keep saying that there are language elements for multi-
threading in C++0x but nobody could enumerate any single languge
element so far.
They have, you just have to realise that a language element does not
have to be a keyword.
Several people did not reply to my request to point out what are the
language elements for concurrency in the proposed C++0x standard. When
I make a list for them, asking (1) what are the language elements for
starting a thread of compulation, (2) by which language elements
mutual exclusion is specified, (3) what are the language elements for
making the threads synchronised---the answer is silence or ignorance
from several people. (Ok, one of them has admitted that these are at
the library level rather than at the language level.)
"This International Standard specifies requirements for implementations
of the C + + programming language." These are the very first words in
the C++ standard document, since the very same document specifies the
C++ standard library I have to conclude that the library is a *part* of
the language. There are a number of things in the standard library that
can not be written in pure C++, these are things that the committee
decided would be better of in the library instead of using new keywords,
that does not make them any less a part of the language.
I understand that you are not satisfied with the syntax/semantics the
committee have decided on for solving the concurrency issues, but that
does not mean that the solution is not a language solution.