Subject: Re: [boost] [Lockfree review] Meta-comments
From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-28 05:24:05
On 26.07.2011 19:23, Tim Blechmann wrote:
> i would hope that it is to late for a boost.atomic, but at the moment it doesn't
> seem to be obsolete:
> * the c++0x support of clang++ is rather limited. they basically ask you to
> install a patched version of libstdc++.
The patch is just to work around GCC 4.4's broken libstdc++ (it was
written to a draft version of rvalue references).
> and libc++ is listing<atomic> as the
> final remaining piece for quite some time :/
> i cannot comment on the micro$oft side, but i regularly see workarounds for
> missing c99 features ...
VS2010 doesn't have any support for <atomic>, but unlike C99, they
actually plan to support C++0x.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk