Peter wrote:
Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote:
At Tuesday 2004-02-10 17:11, you wrote:
I don't think that my point of view is what you think it is.
given that I normally agree with you I'm beginning to think I mis-interpreted your comments here apology tendered
It's only fair since I probably misinterpreted David Bergman's remark, for which I owe him an apology.
David, please accept my sincere apologies. While I think I kept up with the technical content, I must have missed the rest of the context that prompted your response.
To complete our meta loop, I too apologize for wasting bandwidth with rhetorics. I think we all want to either improve or clarify the Boost.Thread framework, to suit both the theoretic and pragmatic sides of ourselves. I posted a list of the (what I consider to be) three aspectes of the thread library under discussion, although I think it was HTML:ed by my mail client :-( I have not used Boost.Thread for the last year, so I will catch up today (I am using PThreads in a financial project, and would love to have an incentive to switch to Boost.Thread anyway...) and look at how one could introduce typelists specifying the *expected* exceptions to the "thread manager," suggested by Brock, me, and others. /David