Andrey Semashev <andysem <at> mail.ru> writes:
Anthony Williams wrote:
Anthony Williams <anthony_w.geo <at> yahoo.com> writes:
Currently, the boost::move in question is an implementation detail of thread. It is an oversight that it is in the boost namespace and not the detail namespace.
I have now fixed this: I have renamed it to boost::detail::thread_move (and boost::detail::thread_move_t
Hmm... I guess that means users are not allowed to move Boost.Thread components. That's a shame, because I was using this feature in my development.
That's not the intention. This is (largely) an implementation detail to make up for the lack of rvalue references. boost::thread make_thread() { return boost::thread(some_func); } boost::thread x=make_thread(); "just works" --- I added an explicit test for it this morning. Moving from an lvalue used to be done with boost::move(x), and is now boost::detail::thread_move(x) or x.move() (if x is a boost::thread).
Maybe moving to boost::threads namespace or just renaming them would be a better solution?
We could just have boost::thread_move become a documented public interface, and have the type remain in boost::detail (since it *is* an implementation detail). Thoughts anyone? Roland? Anthony