Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] [signals2][review] The review of the signals2 library (formerly thread_safe_signals) begins today, Nov 1st
From: Johan Råde (rade_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-03 13:54:22

Next message: David Abrahams: "Re: [boost] Boost 1.37.0 Release Notice"
Previous message: k-oli_at_[hidden]: "Re: [boost] [threadpool] new version v12 - conclusion?"
In reply to: Stjepan Rajko: "[boost] [signals2][review] The review of the signals2 library (formerly thread_safe_signals) begins today, Nov 1st"
Next in thread: Frank Mori Hess: "Re: [boost] [signals2][review] The review of the signals2 library (formerly thread_safe_signals) begins today, Nov 1st"
Reply: Frank Mori Hess: "Re: [boost] [signals2][review] The review of the signals2 library (formerly thread_safe_signals) begins today, Nov 1st"

What is the rationale for ditching boost::trackable?

If I were to switch from signals to signals2 in the projejct I'm currently working on,
some trackable declaration would have to be replaced by several track calls.
That would add a lot of clutter and I feel the new mechanism is more error prone.

--Johan Råde

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

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