Re: [boost] [1.51][Release] Short release cycle

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.51][Release] Short release cycle
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-30 04:31:46

>>>> * there is no policy about c++11 libraries, so i cannot merge
>>>> boost.lockfree into trunk by cutting the boost.atomic dependency
>>>
>>> No, as long as your review manager is happy, you have every right to
>>> add your library to *trunk* and it really is advisable to do so.
>>
>> hartmut?
> 
> I have no objections. However I'd suggest leaving the boost.atomics library
> as an implementation detail as part of your library. We will have many users
> of C++03 for quite some time. It would be a pity to have your library
> available on C++11 platforms only.

i'm not a big fan of adding boost.atomic as implementation detail:

* atomic should not be pulled into the namespace boost, but should live
  in boost::lockfree::detail. however i'm pulling either std::atomic or
  boost::atomic into boost::lockfree::detail, which means that
  everything should be in boost::lockfree::atomic_detail.
  with the highly templated design of boost.atomic this is quite a
  pains, because i have to touch about every other line.
  i could simply leave atomic in namespace boost, but that does not
  sound right to me, either

* the examples require atomic_int. i could however just make the
  examples c++11-only

tim