Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Third release is ready, requesting preliminary review
From: Chad Nelson (chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-02 14:26:46

Hash: SHA1

On 05/02/2010 02:06 PM, Scott McMurray wrote:

>> Sorry, but I'm confused. How would that be different from what the
>> library is doing now?
> Semantically? It wouldn't. It just means you're leaving the thread
> safety choices up to the user by providing the same guarantees that
> just about every type in the standard and boost offer: Independent
> instances can be used independently, shared instances need mutex.
> Leave it up to the user whether they want thread-specific random,
> mutexed random, task-queue-controlled random, whatever.

Sorry again, but I wasn't just asking about semantics -- I'm asking what
you're suggesting the actual code should look like. I'm going through a
function at least partly so that I can wrap the provided random
generator to provide the unsigned int type that my code is expecting,
regardless of what type or size the generator is defined to return,
without overly complicating things for the user of the library. Look at
the definition of detail::random_generator in random.hpp to see what I mean.
- --
Chad Nelson
Oak Circle Software, Inc.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


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