Re: [boost] [thread] Can Boost.Thread use Boost.Atomic without falling on a compatibility issue?

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] Can Boost.Thread use Boost.Atomic without falling on a compatibility issue?
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-12 18:15:23

Le 12/01/13 19:50, Andrey Semashev a écrit :
> On January 12, 2013 9:57:22 PM "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" 
> <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> Andrey, the provided patch goes too far for what I was expecting. You
>> have made a lot of changes, C++11 interface has not been preserved, and
>> I'm not sure the algorithm is the same.
>
> The algorithm is different for sure. What exactly do you mean by C++11 
> interface? Does C++11 have call_once? The only C++11 thing I saw was 
> the once_flag definition which gave no apparent benefits.
>
>
>
C++11 defines the following interface. There is no STD_ONCE_INIT 
initializer.

struct once_flag {
   constexpr once_flag() noexcept;
   once_flag(const once_flag&) = delete;
   once_flag& operator=(const once_flag&) = delete;
};
template<class Callable, class ...Args>
void call_once(once_flag& flag, Callable func, Args&&... args);

Could this once_flag be implemented using the trick you used to mask the 
atomic dependency on the header file?

Vicente