On Oct 21, 2012, at 2:28 AM, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Le 20/10/12 20:41, Andrzej Krzemienski a écrit :
2012/10/20 Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr>
What do you think of adding a thread_guard class that could interrupt and
join on the destructor?
By "adding", do you mean adding it to Boost? I suggested this interruption because I believed (apparently incorrectly) that class thread represents a tool ready to be used by "end-user" programmers. After this discussion I realize that thread is a low-level primitive that you use for building high-level concurrency constructs, but would rather not use it directly. Following this view, anyone can build their own abstraction atop boost::thread. I do not think the above thread_guard should be added into Boost. If I need it I can write it myself (and I would probably write it differently; e.g. using variadic forwarding constructor). I agree that these classes are easy to write by the user. Maybe adding them as examples of use in the documentation could help the user.
I don't agree with the it's-easy-to-write-so-don't-add-it-to-Boost philosophy. By adding such a class to Boost, you highlight the idea to those that otherwise hadn't thought of it, and you standardize the I/F and semantics. ___ Rob