[Dune-devel] [SOCIS 2014]: C++11 threads vs POSIX threads

[Agnese, Marco]

Hi Christoph,
you are right.

I go through the source and the documentation of TinyThread++1.1. We can use C++11 when is supported and include the TinyThread library (which is only 3 files) to have a backwards compatibility. 

TinyThread++1.1 does NOT support all the capabilities of C++11 but only a subset. We can try to use only the subset of features.
Cheers
Marco 
________________________________________
From: 7135b8d6-3e78-dd11-9c85-005056a46000 at iws.uni-stuttgart.de [7135b8d6-3e78-dd11-9c85-005056a46000 at iws.uni-stuttgart.de] on behalf of Christoph Grüninger [christoph.grueninger at iws.uni-stuttgart.de]
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2014 4:17 PM
To: Agnese, Marco; dune-devel at dune-project.org
Subject: Re: [Dune-devel] [SOCIS 2014]: C++11 threads vs POSIX threads

Hi Marco,

> I prefer the C++11 way like you. Moreover I see threads just
>an additional feature since they do not add any functionality
>apart a performance boost.

But the performance boost is most important on supercomputer
which have good multi-threading possibilities. And on these
computers the backwards compatibility is must crucial. Thus,
your argument is kind of weak.

> Obviously libraries could help but I always prefer the STL
> to external ones since it is standardized.
> Since every C++ developer is familiar with it, it is more
> simple for everyone to contribute to the code without
> spending time learning new libraries.

Please have a closer look at the libraries I named. They seem
to implement the C++11 threading for compilers that do not
natively offer these capabilities.

Bye
Christoph

--
Das Kommt darauf an, in welchen Zeiträumen du
rechnest. Für Geologen: ja, in naher Zukunft
[Stefan Seyfried in suse-laptop]