On Jul 27, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Russell Hind wrote:
Doug Gregor wrote:
We'll naturally be taking the good features from both libraries (tracking, combining, syntax, etc.) and tossing out the bad (*ahem* named slot groups). Interested Boosters are welcome to join us over in that forum.
You probably don't want this question here, but would thread-safety by discussed for the proposal? We couldn't use boost::signals because it wasn't thread-safe and ended-up using our own wrapper around boost::signals which made them thread-safe.
We can't write any standardese for thread safety (Standard C++ doesn't have threads... yet), but we'll try to be ensure that the interface can be implemented in a thread-safe manner and give advice for implementors regarding how to do it. Doug