[cpp-threads] Update

[Boehm, Hans]

> From: Peter Dimov
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 2:21 PM
> To: C++ threads standardisation
> Subject: Re: [cpp-threads] Update
> 
> Boehm, Hans wrote:
> 
> >> This formulation supercedes both strong CAS and weak CAS, as it's 
> >> allowed to fail. A strong CAS is easily built on top of it 
> by using a 
> >> retry loop.
> 
> > You're assuming the feature test for whether this is wait-free will 
> > yield false if it can fail spuriously?  Otherwise you can't build 
> > guaranteed wait-free algorithms?  Or do you not care?  (This is a 
> > serious question:  I'm not sure if I do.)
> 
> I can't think of a reason to ever use that feature test. What 
> could I do with the answer? 
> 
Presumably fail conspicuously with a message that you can't meet a hard
real-time guarantee?

Having said that, I'm still not at all sure that we should care about
any of this.

Hans