Re: [Boost-users] atomic_count default constructor

From: Clark S. Cox III (clarkcox3_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-16 14:15:37

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Peter Dimov wrote:
> Clark S. Cox III wrote:
> 
>> A couple of questions:
>>
>> Is there any rational behind the fact that boost::detail::atomic_count
>> doesn't have a default constructor?
> 
> The interface is specified in a way that makes 'int' or 'long' meet its 
> requirements, so that one can typedef atomic_count to int/long in ST builds.

OK, that makes perfect sense, thanks.

- --
Clark S. Cox III
clarkcox3_at_[hidden]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFhEXYXkPInUR5a8wRAhzWAJ42WK68VclWFMkIGCcGuy+UF2nAlgCfTOUo
9ZTYvBOV4Qu8LWFTGt8VYK8=
=1KDd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----