Boost logo

Boost :

From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-17 12:27:01

Beman Dawes wrote:
> Although these clock and time features evolved from Boost Date-Time, the
> actual realization is quite different. So we've got a transition that
> has to be managed. I'd personally like to see that transition occur
> quickly, both because Boost.Threads depends on these features, and
> because I can now bring forward an improved Boost.Timer based on these
> features.

I agree.

> One suggestion is for Boost to provide an implementation of the headers
> to be added to C++0x, and then to use those headers in the various Boost
> libraries that need them. But I haven't thought it out in any detail.

Interprocess was built around Howard's old threads proposal. I would
like to update condition variables, mutexes, locks, etc... to the new
interface. I also would like make Interprocess synchronization objects
compatible with standard locks and lock algorithms.

> How should we proceed? Comments? Ideas? Suggestions?

I think we should first offer an standard interface while maintaining
old Boost.DateTime intact because many Boost users are using the
original DateTime. Then I would proceed to change Boost.Thread
maintaining backwards compatibility (recent Boost.Thread changes caused
several code breaks, and I think we should maintain compatibility with
current proposal at least for some time) and then change all other
interested libraries. Does this make sense?

> --Beman


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at