并发 [英] Concurrency
问题描述
是否有任何指标
1）C ++委员会是否会在下一个标准中包含
并发
2 ）它会是什么样的（Java，ZThreads等）
/ David
2004年1月21日星期三01:30:59 +0100，David Rasmussen< da ************* @ gmx.net>写道：
是否有任何指标
1）C ++委员会是否会在下一个标准中包含并发性
2）它会是什么样的（Java，ZThreads等）
如果有的话，可能会提升线程。查看
< url：http：//www.boost.org/libs/thread/doc/index.html>。
或者pthreads。
但是我希望这次没有添加这样的支持。
没有标准的线程处理反映了
的情况标准库不是为多线程而设计的，不稳定的'
接下来是不可用的，依此类推。特别是，线程中存在棘手的异常问题。更大的图片是
异常重要性级别，下一个不可用的异常层次结构，
以及处理析构函数中的多个异常和异常，
如果被解决需要兼容并与线程集成。
2004年1月21日星期三01:30:59 +0100 comp.lang.c ++，David Rasmussen
< da ************* @ gmx.net>据称写了：是否有任何指标
1）C ++委员会是否会在下一个标准中包含并发性
2）它的外观（Java，ZThreads等）
讨论C ++标准化过程的新闻组和
是什么C ++委员会将做的是comp.std.c ++（请在发布
之前先阅读。）
http://groups.google.com/groups?scor...mp。 std.c％2B％2B
Alf P. Steinbach写道：
可能提升线程，如果有的话。查看
< url：http：//www.boost.org/libs/thread/doc/index.html>。
或者pthreads。
并行线程？当然，如果有的话，这将是一个OOP
的方法。
没有标准的线程处理反映了标准库不是为你设计的情况多线程，即'volatile''
接下来是无法使用的，依此类推。
尽管如此，标准库
的许多化身还是能够很好地应对并发性吗？这不是
不可能。
特别是线程中存在棘手的异常问题。
它在Java中工作得相当好，不是吗？
和
异常重要性水平相比更大的图片，旁边的不可用的异常层次结构，以及处理析构函数中的多个异常和异常，如果需要与线程兼容并集成，则
我不确定这些问题是否超过
问题，因为该语言没有标准化的并发性
模型。
但我现在看到我的讨论不合适了，所以：
对不起:)
/ David
Are there any indicators for
1) whether the C++ commitee will include
concurrency in the next standard
2) what it will look like (Java, ZThreads, etc.)
/David
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 01:30:59 +0100, David Rasmussen <da*************@gmx.net> wrote:
Are there any indicators for
1) whether the C++ commitee will include
concurrency in the next standard
2) what it will look like (Java, ZThreads, etc.)
Probably Boost Threads, if anything. Check out
<url: http://www.boost.org/libs/thread/doc/index.html>.
Alternatively pthreads.
But I hope such support isn''t added this time.
Not having thread handling standardized reflects the situation that
the standard library isn''t designed for multithreading, that ''volatile''
is next to unusable, and so on. In particular, there is the thorny
issue of exceptions in threads. And the somewhat larger picture of
exception importance levels, the next to unusable exception hierarchy,
and handling of multiple exceptions and exceptions in destructors,
which if addressed needs to be compatible and integrated with threads.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 01:30:59 +0100 in comp.lang.c++, David Rasmussen
<da*************@gmx.net> was alleged to have written:Are there any indicators for
1) whether the C++ commitee will include
concurrency in the next standard
2) what it will look like (Java, ZThreads, etc.)
The newsgroup for the discussion of the C++ standardization process and
what the C++ committee will do is comp.std.c++ (please read first before
posting.)
http://groups.google.com/groups?scor...mp.std.c%2B%2B
Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
Probably Boost Threads, if anything. Check out
<url: http://www.boost.org/libs/thread/doc/index.html>.
Alternatively pthreads.
Pthreads? Surely, if anything, it will be an OOP
approach.
Not having thread handling standardized reflects the situation that
the standard library isn''t designed for multithreading, that ''volatile''
is next to unusable, and so on.
Still, many incarnations of the standard library
exist that cope well with concurrency? It''s not
impossible.
In particular, there is the thorny
issue of exceptions in threads.
It works reasonably well in Java, doesn''t it?
And the somewhat larger picture of
exception importance levels, the next to unusable exception hierarchy,
and handling of multiple exceptions and exceptions in destructors,
which if addressed needs to be compatible and integrated with threads.
I''m not sure these problems are greater than the
problem of not having a standardized concurrency
model in the language.
But I see now that my discussion is off topic, so:
sorry :)
/David
这篇关于并发的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
