Re: [boost] [config] request for BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_ATOMIC

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] request for BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_ATOMIC
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-06-30 05:27:20

>>>> preparing boost.lockfree for trunk, i need a good way to figure out if
>>>> the <atomic> header is available. would it be possible to add a macro to
>>>> detect that? BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_ATOMIC or the like?
>>>>
>>>> thanks, tim
>>>
>>> FYI, gcc 4.4 has <cstdatomic> instead of <atomic> with the same contents.
>>> I
>>> don't know about other compilers, maybe there are other similar cases. So
>>> we may be better have <boost/atomic.hpp> which defines the macro or
>>> includes the appropriate compiler header otherwise. Or perhaps this is
>>> the Boost.Atomic job.
>>
>> one point is to have an <atomic> header, the second point is an
>> compliant implementation of atomic<>. gcc did not support atomic<> for
>> structs before 4.7 :/
> 
> I guess, it means we need another macro then.

or BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_ATOMIC should be defined, unless the
implementation is complete.