Re: [boost] Fw: [atomic] review results

Tim Blechmann wrote:

isn't atomic_is_lock_free only defined for integral types?

I'm not aware of any such requirement.

and why isn't atomic::is_lock_free a static member function?

I don't know.

dispatching per-object would actually make sense, because there may be platforms which require objects to be aligned to certain memory boundaries for double-width CAS.

It can be read that way, but it doesn't make much sense from the user's perspective for objects to randomly be lock-free or non-lock-free. std::atomic<> should ensure the necessary alignment.