From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-06-30 22:48:57
--- In boost_at_y..., Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_a...> wrote:
> At 11:41 AM 6/30/2001, Jeremy Siek wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Peter Dimov wrote:
> >> Creation on the heap is orders of magnitude more expensive than
> managing
> >a
> >> reference count.
> >>
> >> This is the major problem I see with a noncopyable design.
[This is not
> >> limited to the current discussion, but applies in general.] The
design
> >> forces the user to use 'new,' a keyword that has no place in
user land.
> >
> >I agree strongly with this. The design should not force the user
to call
> >'new'. I'd much rather see a copyable thread_id type.
>
> I've also come around to that view. We may now all be arguing
violently
> about something we all agree on.
Well, I don't agree with it ;). However, it seems like I've become a
minority of one, and since my own initial design used ref-counting...
I'll stop arguing now. Give me a few days and I'll have an
implementation using thread::ref.
Bill Kempf