From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,4215feeab2a8154a X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: John McCabe Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: C++0x and Threads - a poor relation to Ada's tasking model? Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:57:00 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: <7q2385104kihs87d79p8kfphuoki6r01vq@4ax.com> <81a101a3-b46e-4268-973c-356c6119ee2b@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <2785ff1e-661b-41ce-95a8-cef2862e2907@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <6239906b-e952-4bf9-8a11-b7faf942bdde@k19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: RXEkuaSUwmKe0XIGFYSK7A.user.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.9 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 Cancel-Lock: sha1:yaO4UiRhfDZZopwYFOcxRxR4cNg= Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7738 Date: 2009-08-13T14:57:00+01:00 List-Id: On 13 Aug 2009 12:47:39 GMT, "Peter C. Chapin" wrote: >Ada provides language syntax for concurrency. It feels cleaner to me than >any of the C++ thread libraries I have used. Is that because those C++ >libraries just don't have the interface "right?" Maybe. But it might also >be because it's just not possible to express concurrency in a nice clean >way when using only library calls. This is true. I'm thinking in particular of the way 'futures' are defined when compared to just using an Ada rendezvous.