Re: [Boost-users] [signals] thread-safe post-disconnect() cleanup

From: Frank Mori Hess (fmhess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-24 11:47:01

On Saturday 24 February 2007 11:18 am, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 10:10 am, Timmo Stange wrote:
> > We should also keep in mind what the tracking will be used for mostly.
> > I think this is in order of importance:
> > 1. tracking of objects for member function slots
> > 2. tracking of parameters directly
> > 3. tracking of signals as slots
> > 4. tracking of indirectly related objects
> >
> > If that is close to reality, shifting to explicit tracking is a major
> > change. Cases 1 and 2 are handled quite well with the implicit
> > tracking. Case 3 involves some acrobatics in the implementation
>
> I wasn't planning on dropping support for automatic tracking of signals,
> I don't see that dropping it would make things any less confusing for
> the user.

Or, rather, I'd say if automatic signal tracking is unintuitive, that 
happened back when we deprecated trackable, with its idea of trackability 
being a property of a class.

-- 
Frank