This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of NAD Editorial status.
Section: 99 [futures.atomic_future] Status: NAD Editorial Submitter: INCITS Opened: 2010-08-25 Last modified: 2016-02-10
Priority: Not Prioritized
View all other issues in [futures.atomic_future].
View all issues with NAD Editorial status.
According to the definition of atomic_future, all members of atomic_future are synchronizing except constructors. However, it would probably be appropriate for a move constructor to be synchronizing on the source object. If not, the postconditions on paragraphs 7-8, might not be satisfied. This may be applicable if a collection of futures are being doled out to a set of threads that process their value.
[ Resolution proposed by ballot comment: ]
Make the move constructor for atomic future lock the source