From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-27 06:17:23
"Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)" <SeeWebsiteForEmail_at_[hidden]> writes:
> What other forms of concurrent programming?
I don't know what Beman was referring to, but process-based
concurrency and distributed concurrency are not usually considered
"threading."
> I also wonder how work on accepting libraries can be done before or
> concurrently :o) with language changes that render them legitimate.
You make some educated guesses rather than waiting for all the details
to settle. I don't think the major elements of the new memory model
are still in doubt.
> This has been a thorny issue for the memory model group. We
> basically have decided to finish the memory model first. In face of
> other threading libraries being proposed (by the way does any of the
> three support lock-free programming?), we might have to obey market
> laws and start working on a library as well, because we have a good
> idea on how it would look like.
I think it would be dangerous to do otherwise. There simply isn't
enough time.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com