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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk