Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!207.14.113.41!news.alt.net!not-for-mail From: "Le Chaud Lapin" Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++.moderated Subject: Re: C++ Threads, what's the status quo? Date: 5 Jan 2007 15:02:57 -0500 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 46 Sender: cppm...@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Approved: c.l....@bazarov.com Message-ID: <1167948525.444281.269150@q40g2000cwq.googlegroups.com> References: <1167139437.608835.58780@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: netlab.cs.rpi.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: (Usenet) Return-Path: X-Original-Date: 4 Jan 2007 14:08:45 -0800 X-Submission-Address: c++-sub...@netlab.cs.rpi.edu X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.lang.c++.moderated iQBVAwUARZ6u/0HMCo9UcraBAQGk2gH/aU93q8Uclua6OzEjYQFynTWJ9O3AgZgh compgmYbkt/RqL0IithoFOAxbTh27GDGoKLhy3YQPkMZ0t3Z1/MChg== =S8Dg Francis Glassborow wrote: > The only deduction I can make from this is that you believe C++ should > be dead and buried. C++ without threading will be tantamount to useless > by the end of this decade. Even mobile phones us multi-core processors > these days. And my point is that multi-threading is in the process of > becoming equivalent to concurrent programming and C++ needs to address > that issue. I have a threading library in C++ that is portable to Windows & Linux, and probably another other OS's where the kernel-mode people did their part and provided the minimum set of synchronization primitives. It is not a full-featured library. There are some questions that I did not try to answer. There are also some areas that could be cleaner. But the key point is that the interface is mostly clean, the interface is portable, the model does not leave you wrestling with your own brain as you use it, something I would imagine other people who have tried to make "thread objects" have discovered (I learned the hard way that it is not good to regard a thread as an object). The point is that C++ and threading are alive and well. People use them together. Some people use the native API of their OS, which is not always pleasant to use. Some people wrap these API's. But I do not think it is fair to say that we do not understand the importance of multi-threading programming by C++ programmers. We do. What we are saying is that the fundamentals of multi-threading, barring some massive break through in the state-of-the -art, are well-understood, and it is our opinion that those who think that the language itself is somehow deficient in this regard are mistaken. Anything that the C++ community does with regard to "adding threading to the language" is going to eventually lead right to the primitives that actually implement synchronization, primitives that are 40 years old. After all, when we talk about "threading", we are talking about synchronization. -Le Chaud Lapin- -- [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]