David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
Beman Dawes <bdawes@acm.org> writes:
What should the roadmap be for moving this header into Boost?
Should it be a separate library? Seems smallish for that.
Does it need a formal review? A mini-review?
Is it OK if I put in CVS now in boost/detail?
Opinions?
As long as it is an implementation detail of other libraries, it can live in boost/detail. If it's to be a public interface, it should get a review (mini, IMO).
The types would be definitely part of the public interface of asio at least (i.e. error_code parameters on sync functions and callback function objects), so I guess that would mean a review. Is it feasible to get a review done in time for including this stuff in 1.35? I want to avoid changing the asio public interface after it goes out in a boost release, and switching error types is likely to be a breaking change. Cheers, Chris