[thread] Backwards compatibility for timed_lock?
We're in the process of upgrading to 1.35 and have discovered that there are no timed_lock() overloads accepting the old xtime structure. Was this intentional or an oversight? It isn't mentioned in the list of "breaking changes" in the 1.35 release notes. For example, timed_wait() does have overloads for xtime... -Chris
Chris Newbold <Chris.Newbold@mathworks.com> writes:
We're in the process of upgrading to 1.35 and have discovered that there are no timed_lock() overloads accepting the old xtime structure. Was this intentional or an oversight? It isn't mentioned in the list of "breaking changes" in the 1.35 release notes.
For example, timed_wait() does have overloads for xtime...
It's an oversight. I intended uses of xtime to work as before. Please file a trac ticket. Anthony -- Anthony Williams | Just Software Solutions Ltd Custom Software Development | http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk Registered in England, Company Number 5478976. Registered Office: 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL
From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Williams Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:51 PM
Chris Newbold <Chris.Newbold@mathworks.com> writes:
We're in the process of upgrading to 1.35 and have discovered that there are no timed_lock() overloads accepting the old xtime structure. Was this intentional or an oversight? It isn't mentioned in the list of "breaking changes" in the 1.35 release notes.
For example, timed_wait() does have overloads for xtime...
It's an oversight. I intended uses of xtime to work as before. Please file a trac ticket.
Done. See http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2052 -Chris
participants (2)
-
Anthony Williams -
Chris Newbold