This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of Resolved status.
Section: 32.7.4 [thread.condition.condvar] Status: Resolved Submitter: Pete Becker Opened: 2009-01-07 Last modified: 2016-01-28
Priority: Not Prioritized
View all other issues in [thread.condition.condvar].
View all issues with Resolved status.
Discussion:
32.7.4 [thread.condition.condvar]: the specification for wait_for
with no predicate has an effects clause that says it calls wait_until,
and a returns clause that sets out in words how to determine the return
value. Is this description of the return value subtly different from the
description of the value returned by wait_until? Or should the effects
clause and the returns clause be merged?
[ Summit: ]
Move to open. Associate with LWG 859(i) and any other monotonic-clock related issues.
[ 2009-08-01 Howard adds: ]
I believe that 859(i) (currently Ready) addresses this issue, and that this issue should be marked NAD, solved by 859(i) (assuming it moves to WP).
[ 2009-10 Santa Cruz: ]
Mark as
NAD EditorialResolved, addressed by resolution of Issue 859(i).
Proposed resolution: