Subject: Re: [boost] Pondering Futures
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-09 17:04:21
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Anthony Williams <anthony.ajw_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Tom Brinkman" <reportbase_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Ponderings on the Futures Library:
>> What is the status of Anthony Williams' submission of the futures
>> library to the c++ standards committee?
> Futures have been approved by the committee. They are part of the
> current working draft:
And the technical content of N2798 is the same as N2800, which was
shipped as CD-1 and is now in the ISO balloting process.
CD-1 isn't intended to pass the ballot. Rather, it serves to put the
world on notice that C++0x is feature complete. Essentially a fairly
late beta release. That means that committee work on C++0x futures is
done, except for corrections in response to ballot comments.
It would be very unusual if futures did not make it into the final
C++0x standard, and with little if any change from the current
specification. What change do occur will be mostly tightening up the
specification and tweaking the wording. Few if any new features will
So we should aim for the Boost threading library to conform to N2800
as closely as we can. It is OK to add extensions, but we shouldn't
leave out features or change existing features, IMO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk