[boost] Re: [Threads] Simple active object wrapper, take 2

From: Matthew Vogt (mvogt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-25 22:39:10

Matthew Vogt <mvogt <at> juptech.com> writes:

> Perhaps I've been heading off on a tangent, but it actually sounds like what
> you want is a variant of boost::signal that could communicate between threads.
> In this design, the callback would have to seamlessly mutate into a decoupled
> method invocation like that in my Proxy objects.  Actually, this sounds like
> an obvious thing for someone to have tried before...
> 

In fact, from the Boost.Signals FAQ:

  "2. Is Boost.Signals thread-safe?
        
  No. Using Boost.Signals in a multithreaded concept is very dangerous, and it 
  is very likely that the results will be less than satisfying. Boost.Signals
  will support thread safety in the future."

Has there been any activity on this front?