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: 2013-01-13 14:20:07

Le 13/01/13 19:44, Jeff Flinn a écrit :
> On 1/12/2013 5:37 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> in order to fix this issue, https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/5752
>> : "boost::call_once() is unreliable on some platforms", I would like to
>> use Boost.Atomic as suggested on the ticket. As Boost.Atomic is not a
>> header-only library the user would need to link with boost_atomic.
>
> As long as I can link against a static lib, I've got no problem.
>
>> Is this an acceptable change? I'm requesting this as recently there were
>> some people reactive to some changes in Boost.Thread. Would this be
>> considered an compatibility issue?
>
> To me it is acceptable. I don't look at it as being a compatibility 
> issue, assuming no semantic differences, other than fixing the 
> reliability of call_once.
>
>> If yes should the fix for the call_once issue be included if the user
>> request it using conditional compilation or even go on a separated
>> version of Boost.Thread?
>
> If a single implementation works, I would avoid the complexity of 
> conditional compilation, or splitting a new lib.
>
>
Thanks Jeff. I take your answer as no problem even if linking with 
Boost.Atomic is needed on some platforms.

Thanks,
Vicente