Le 16/03/2017 à 19:09, Oswin Krause via Boost a écrit :
Hi,
On 2017-03-16 13:03, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Oswin Krause wrote:
Hi,
I doubt that sarcasm will help solve the severe interoperability issues between the very close boost and std versions.
What severe interoperability issues? sorry for the slightly late reply.
Interoperability issues between code that is designed using the std:: versions and code using the boost libraries. Starting with: mixing boost and std libraries as it was intended to be. boost::shared_ptr is an example that one can get to work [1], however it is not straight forward(look at all the slightly wrong code out there) and requires sacrifices in performance. Most other libraries are harder and the situation is often even undefined. For example, I have no idea what will happen when I use std::this_thread inside a thread started by boost::thread. This must works as it must work for any native thread. Thus it is hard for me to write code that is agnostic to the threading library used. However, if i settle for boost::thread i also have to use boost::chrono. I could use preprocessor macros, but if I have to deliver a library, I have to make a hard decision.
Could you explain what is the problem having to use also Boost.Chrono? Vicente