On Behalf Of Michael Glassford Subject: [boost] Re: Re: Formal review queue
Were there any changes that particularly concern you? I'm not too concerned about much and most things should be resolvable with a little email conversation via the list.
Trivia like the name of rw_mutex, ensuring the orthogonality of the interface, making sure a little boolean conversion sneaks in for a lock. Things like that. I'm not clever enough to get beyond trivia... Maybe splitting boost::thread into separate namespaces. Fundamentally mutexes, locks and some other things might have nothing to do with threads, the thread effect might be implicit, but another namespace also seems overkill. I worry that concurrency and synchronisation do not mean explicit threading. It does raise the issue of the size and scale of library changes as it seems that library approval indicates author approval to make future changes and though this seems to have worked very well so far, it will fail at some stage. Nothing lasts for ever (homily about my extraordinary wife omitted). I think you, Mr Michael G, is doing a lovely job of tackling boost::thread and I do appreciate your efforts. Regards, Matt Hurd.