Re: thread-safety definition

[David Abrahams <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave Butenhof <David.Butenhof@xxxxxx> writes:

> So whether your argument is relevant depends a lot on where this
> feature sits. If it's something that "might be nice" but isn't really
> important for portable applications to have, then yeah, maybe it sits
> above the bar. I know you have that opinion of 2-phase EH, for
> example, and as much as I like it I don't strongly disagree. But
> that's not a foregone conclusion for THIS feature, or any other. And
> if it's decided to be important then the fact that it makes life hard
> for someone who wants to ship a braindead implementation should be
> irrelevant.
>
> At least in theory. And, in theory, there's no difference between
> theory and practice. ;-)

My point is that this feature requires approximately the same
resources as 2-phase EH.  If you're going to mandate one of them, you
might as well mandate both because all the infrastructure will be
there.  If one of them is demanding to be mandated, then both are.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com