Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
RoundPotato

many potatersssss

This topic is 2147 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement

If you can't figure out how to get boost to work, consider upgrading your compiler. Threading support is now part of the standard library as of C++11. std::thread is largely based on boost::thread and will work out of the box with a C++11 compiler. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offence/disrespect on the following sentence meant(please): Yeah multi-threading is very scary....it's like an Armageddon... well, no, not really.
Obviously I not only need them as common sense but I also need them at the moment for server side to listen and deal with multiple connections.

Thing is, you can put "no disrespect" on anything you like but from what I'm reading you seem very set on the idea that you know better than everyone here so I'm not entirely sure why you're even asking.

Threading for sockets is a legitimate practice but you can certainly do networking without needing multiple threads, there are non-blocking sockets for this reason.
 

The most flexible and low on resources implementation there is as well as most used, supported, proven, etc. etc. You know, the usual.

There's no "usual" in programming, what is good in one situation isn't good in another. The fact you don't seem to know that is rather scary. People have already mentioned that the C++ threading code is almost identical to the boost one so obviously it would be preferable to use the C++ standard library version unless you have either good reason to use the boost one or do not have access to it on your compiler.
 

I'm afraid you are wrong, please see http://orwelldevcpp.blogspot.com/ .
 
C++11 is a relatively new "thing" and as I mentioned I was advised that Boost Threads are more "powerful" or "flexible".

I wouldn't call a fork of an IDE to be the same as the original IDE, in fact if its a fork it shouldn't be using the same name in general.

What cracks me up in general is that you're so interested in having the "perfect" or "most optimal" library for a situation you don't even seem to be able to adequately explain, and ontop of that you're using an ide/compiler that I can almost guarentee does not have the same support or quality as half of what SiCrane just listed.

Visual studio doesn't even support all of C++11 yet and I believe gcc is still missing some as well, so it's not exactly unrealistic to think a fork of a long dead program might not support something like the new threading.

Not trying to be rude or anything here, just giving you a reality check. You're coming off more as trying to tell everyone they're wrong than to ask why they suggest what they do. Edited by Satharis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!