Thanks for your reply. That is really petty, that the standard will be
partially useful :( Is there any chance to get your ideas on handling thread
priorities? Should I may be move this discussion to the std-c++ list?
Many thanks,
Ovanes
On Feb 7, 2008 1:20 AM, Howard Hinnant
On Feb 6, 2008, at 2:24 PM, Ovanes Markarian wrote:
Hello,
I used boost thread library a lot and like it very much. Currently, I was reading the C++ Standerd proposal and saw that a thread (as well as boost::thread) does not have a priority. Which reason was it not to implement the thread priority in boost, and why is it not considered in the upcoming standard? I understand this feature is rarely required, but if someone suddenly needs to start a real-time priority thread he/she will be forced to use a third party lib again. Or is there smth. what I miss?
I can answer the std::part. I attempted to introduce a fairly rudimentary priority system into the std::thread proposal and it ended up being sufficiently controversial that I pulled it in order to get the std::thread proposal to advance. It is my hope (as a fallback position) that the "native_handle" interface will allow one to adjust thread priorities, albeit in a non-portable fashion.
-Howard
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users