Re: [Boost-users] [signals] connection::add_tracked() proposal

From: Frank Mori Hess (frank.hess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-21 15:13:01

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

On Wednesday 21 February 2007 15:04 pm, you wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 February 2007 14:08 pm, Gottlob Frege wrote:
> > Do you think having a slot that requires multiple objects to be
> > tracked is common?
> > Should we have both the single param guarantor (typical case?) plus
> > the ability to add additional things to track?
>
> Well, we could just keep around boost::track() if
> connection::add_tracked() is considered too ugly for the common case.

Oh, another idea is to put add_tracked() in the slot class instead of the 
connection class.  Then all the tracked objects could be added to the slot 
before the connection is made, which would be slightly less error prone 
wrt races.

- -- 
Frank
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFF3KfO5vihyNWuA4URAjU4AJ9Y29IN+8je6MUtQ9EvcUEQyckdyACePo3V
ONZXl4UY7E9NkZfnO0r5D68=
=ZRX3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----