Re: [boost] Proposal for library addition: faster signals/slots, reactor, atomics

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for library addition: faster signals/slots, reactor, atomics
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-25 07:23:46

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/25/2009 05:12 AM, Jeffrey Bosboom wrote:
> Helge Bahmann wrote:
>> Hello everyone
>>
>> I have written a small library providing:
>>
>> - a (thread-safe) signal/slot implementation
>> - poll/timer/reactor implementation
>> - atomic operations modelled after the proposed C++0x standard (x86 32/64 bit, 
>> ppc, alpha, more if someone donates hardware; fallback implementation using 
>> locks)
> 
> I'm not really interested in the signals/slots implementation or the 
> reactor, but I'm very interested in an implementation of the C++0x 
> standard atomics.  I encourage you to split the atomics from the other 
> parts of the library, since they will be useful in many more contexts 
> (including other Boost libraries).

a boost implementation of the c++0x atomic library would greatly
simplify my proposed boost.lockfree library

tim

- -- 
tim_at_[hidden]
http://tim.klingt.org

Art is either a complaint or do something else
  John Cage quoting Jasper Johns
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAksNIc8ACgkQdL+4qsZfVsuKvACfUxdU0fgeCYKa5mDzisRJn74/
Nr0Amwb2cyeTBmJnmD0yoOxD0PS/02sA
=mljR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----