From: John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: C++ threads vs. Ada tasks - surprised
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:12:20 +0100
Date: 2009-08-17T12:12:20+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mmei85h3onua5tpl62f4dh6rtr79gt5nkk@4ax.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: f02a0d10-acaa-47d3-ade8-2e7bd4030bd8@d4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:34:11 -0700 (PDT), Maciej Sobczak
<see.my.homepage@gmail.com> wrote:
>In another thread (pun intended) the discussion on language design
>with regard to threads/tasks got obstructed, so I'm starting a new
>one.
<..snip..>
Have you considered redoing this using the Boost::Thread library? I
imagine that it's a fairly direct mapping on to the posix calls you've
used by the looks of it, but....
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-17 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-16 21:34 C++ threads vs. Ada tasks - surprised Maciej Sobczak
2009-08-17 7:12 ` Stephen Leake
2009-08-17 8:14 ` Maciej Sobczak
2009-08-17 19:44 ` vlc
2009-08-17 8:04 ` Frederik Sausmikat
2009-08-17 8:17 ` Maciej Sobczak
2009-08-17 8:28 ` Tomek Wałkuski
2009-08-17 9:39 ` Frederik Sausmikat
2009-08-17 9:44 ` Ludovic Brenta
2009-08-17 11:12 ` John McCabe [this message]
2009-08-17 15:20 ` John B. Matthews
2009-08-18 20:36 ` Ira Baxter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox