From: Christopher Kohlhoff (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-31 20:56:10
David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > What should the roadmap be for moving this header into Boost?
> > Should it be a separate library? Seems smallish for that.
> > Does it need a formal review? A mini-review?
> > Is it OK if I put in CVS now in boost/detail?
> > Opinions?
> As long as it is an implementation detail of other libraries,
> it can live in boost/detail. If it's to be a public
> interface, it should get a review (mini, IMO).
The types would be definitely part of the public interface of
asio at least (i.e. error_code parameters on sync functions and
callback function objects), so I guess that would mean a review.
Is it feasible to get a review done in time for including this
stuff in 1.35? I want to avoid changing the asio public interface
after it goes out in a boost release, and switching error types
is likely to be a breaking change.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk