Boost.Signals Accepted

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-28 09:32:29

All reviews were in favor of Boost.Signals, so the library is 
accepted.  Congratualations Douglas Gregor!

Highlights of the more important things brought up in the discussions:

* There's a need to, at a minimum, document the calling order for 
slots, and possibly to allow the user to control the order through a 
naming or priority mechanism.

* The connection type should be seperated into two concepts, 
connection and scoped_connection, to better define and manage 
the "controlling" nature of a connection.

* There was a desire for at least some types to go into a sub-
namespace in order to avoid name clashes in the boost namespace.

And another topic that I think was important for later updates and/or 
a new library:

* There's a need to make the classes thread safe (the manner has not 
been fully determined), and there's also a compelling need for an 
asynchronous version of signals.

Bill Kempf