I use an embedded platform which lacks C++11 support. If C++98/03 compatibility were dropped, Iâd hope thereâd be a better reason for it.
That said, if you can find a clean, safe way to make it a compile-time option, then I could go along with that.
From: Tatsuyuki Ishi [mailto:***@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 4:47
Subject: [asio-users] Using C++11/Boost standard synchronization implementations
I think it's definitely better to use <thread>, <mutex>, <atomic> or the equivalent functions in Boost instead of a custom implementation.
1. They're precompiled system libraries, while asio is commonly used as header-only. Using system libraries also reduce the redundant header inclusions.
2. Less things to manage.
3. std looks better in debugger.
This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.