Subj : Re: Thoughts about threads in C++
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : Jomu
Date : Wed Apr 27 2005 03:20 pm

It seems you would like to trade "function" and "object" approachs for
"syntactic sugar" approach. Nothing bad in that, except you'll need
some kind of "handle" for your threads so you can cancel them, suspend
them, whatever them by some id. That way, you'll get "thread is object"
by backdoor. Also, your scope rules seem clumsy at one fast reading so
it's maybe best to keep "thread body is function/method body" and rely
on established/accepted/understood scope rules.

Important thing to note, IMHO, is: pthreads approach is also "threads
are objects". They are definitely object based, even in their simplest
"C library" form.

In Modula-3 speak, you have Thread.T, MUTEX and Thread.Condition. That
is one basic set of threads primitives and you can't go lower than
that. I've used OO'ness of MUTEX to implement rw-lock with few tens of
lines of source code, and also  cross-address-space rwlocks.

dd

.