Geek Answers Handbook

Boost.Thread or just :: thread?

I am not a Boost user yet. However, I plan to go into it as soon as possible. However, Boost and the likely future clashes of names or differences with the upcoming C ++ 0x are of little concern to me. (Maybe this is not a real problem, but, for example, I believe that the syntax of a strong lambdas signal is rather ugly, BOOST_FOREACH is aggressive to the eyes and other only aesthetic personal views).

I'm really interested in TR2, which seems to be implemented by the Boost.Thread and just :: thread libraries . Both seem to be written and maintained by Anthony Williams.

But just :: thread claims to be fully TR2 compliant.

I wanted to know if any of you would tell me to use one or the other. just :: thread is not free, but if it really is like TR2, I was seduced.

Any thought?

+5
source share
3 answers

I am currently experimenting on Linux with boost, just :: thread libraries and the so-called "experimental" C ++ Ox functions of the gcc g ++ 4.5 compiler. As for streaming, I click that I found the code that I wrote for just :: thread, and the g ++ compiler is 100% compatible. The boost libraries (1.43) are noticeably incompatible with the previous ones. However, for my production code, I use boost libraries.

boost, just:: thread g++. :: thread ++ Ox g++; , :: thread, , , .

+5

, , " , TR2". TR2 ++ 0x, .

, Boost.Thread , .

Boost "", Boost , Boost , , .

, , boost::, , TR2, , std::tr2::.

+4

- : -)

, , , ++ 0x , 2 . - - :-) : -))

, : " "? , # Java . , , , , , , - - , .

If you are touching Boost, make sure you have enough time to make sure that it has no dependencies on a dozen other files with a forced file, and then dozens more ... if you are not an affiliate, that is :-) If you touch to libre demand. Automatic release detection must be prepared for payment in the CPU cycle and deal with potentially unwanted interference.

-1
source

More articles:


All Articles