Re: [boost] [pool] detail/mutex.hpp may include windows.h andpollute namespace with windows definitions.

Subject: Re: [boost] [pool] detail/mutex.hpp may include windows.h andpollute namespace with windows definitions.
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-18 11:55:47

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Mori Hess" <frank.hess_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [pool] detail/mutex.hpp may include windows.h andpollute namespace with windows definitions.

> Just in case it hasn't been mentioned already, it might be helpful to look at 
> boost/smart_ptr/detail/lwm_win32_cs.hpp as it seems to handle the "critical 
> section with or without windows.h" issue already.

Hi,

I have proposed to put some files that avoid the inclusion of <windows.h> file in the boost/detail/win directory (See thread [system][chrono] header only libs" 
<http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/system-chrono-header-only-libs-td2992903.html#a2992903>)

For the moment I have started with the files needed to make Boost.System and Boost.Chrono header only without including windows.h. I propose to move all the definitions as the ones in

* boost/date_time/filetime_functions.hpp 
* boost/detail/interlocked.hpp 
* boost/flyweight/detail/process_id.hpp 
* boost/interprocess/detail/win32_api.hpp 
* boost/smart_ptr/detail/lwm_win32_cs.hpp 
* boost/thread/win32/thread_heap_alloc.hpp 
* boost/thread/win32/thread_primitives.hpp 

to this directory so we can share them in a centralized way for all the Boost libraries. 

In order to ensure that the types corresponds to the ones in windows.h some test must be added, so we can be confident that the layout is the same.

Anyone wanting to joint this effort is welcome :-)

Comments on the current approach?

Best,
_____________________
Vicente Juan Botet Escribá
http://viboes.blogspot.com/