29 Jun
2012
29 Jun
'12
7:04 p.m.
On 29 June 2012 19:37, Lars Viklund <zao@acc.umu.se> wrote:
I already suggested that Tim add Lockfree to trunk with only C++11 support, so you're arguing against the wind, I guess.
And thus begins the downfall.
One library will start to depend on Lockfree, and soon it's all a right mess of trying to get anything to work on a perfectly conformant C++03 compiler.
It's only in trunk, we can discuss this before release (under an appropriate subject line so that people see it....). There are a number of possible solutions to the issue, but I don't think it's fair to block an accepted library that is in condition. A successful review process should mean something.