Hi, why we don't need to protect get_future() function of multiple thread access? // Result retrieval unique_future<R> get_future() { if(!future) { throw future_moved(); } if(future_obtained) { throw future_already_retrieved(); } future_obtained=true; return unique_future<R>(future); } Best _____________________ Vicente Juan Botet Escriba ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Williams" <anthony_w.geo@yahoo.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 10:41 AM Subject: [boost] Review Request: future library (N2561/Williams version)
Hi all,
Having just uploaded my prototype of N2561 futures to my website, I would like it to be considered for review alongside Braddock Gaskill's version. It is not as rich in features as Braddock's version, but this is the current proposal before the C++ committee. I intend to update the proposal in time for the next committee mailing, which is 16th May, so would be grateful if people could comment before then, even if we don't get a formal review. It currently requires the boost trunk.
http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk/files/n2561_future.hpp http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2561.html
Anthony -- Anthony Williams | Just Software Solutions Ltd Custom Software Development | http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk Registered in England, Company Number 5478976. Registered Office: 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost