Subject: Re: [boost] c++03 library survey
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-28 14:46:02
On 08/28/18 17:34, degski via Boost wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 17:04, Andrey Semashev via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> ... would be equivalent to std::atomic?
>
> For that specific reason, yes. So, when your organization then eventually
> in 2030 (or so) moves to a compiler and STL that supports std::atomic,
> atomic is guaranteed to work without issue...
You can already use the current Boost.Atomic for that, as long as you
don't use any extensions.