Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Notice: Boost.Atomic (atomic operations library)
From: Oliver Kowalke (k-oli_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-03 13:01:02

Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Helge Bahmann wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Vicente Botet Escriba wrote:
>> I'm not sure if the free-standing functions are of too much value
>> (personally I dislike them for C++), I will certainly add them if
>> someone wants them, but probably it would be preferrable for them not
>> to live in the root namespace "boost".
> I think, free standing functions can be useful if one needs to operate
> on a POD type (which atomic<T> isn't). For example, one could safely
> use functions with local statics.
> _____________________________________________
I believe Helge's plan was to provide an implementation of C++-0x
atomics - PODs are not part of the 'atomic' interface - so I would vote
against PODs.

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