https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349 <p> Maybe there is a reason, that boost::atomic does not support a specialization for enums and handles them like user-defined types, but lock-free access to enums would be nice. </p> <p> I just extended the existing implementation. Ofc, now code is redundant and functions common to integral and enum specializations maybe moved into a base class to avoid that. </p> en-us /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349 Trac 1.4.3 ingo.loehken@… Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:57:35 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349 <ul> <li><strong>attachment</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">atomic_enum.patch</span> </li> </ul> <p> patch for enum specialization to atomic </p> Ticket Andrey Semashev Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:19:47 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349#comment:1 <ul> <li><strong>cc</strong> <span class="trac-author">Andrey.Semashev@…</span> added </li> </ul> <p> The interface for atomic enums is the same as for user-defined structs, and structs up to the supported size are lock-free. What is the purpose of a separate specialization? </p> Ticket ingo.loehken@… Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:22:07 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349#comment:3 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/10349#comment:3 <ul> <li><strong>status</strong> <span class="trac-field-old">new</span> → <span class="trac-field-new">closed</span> </li> <li><strong>resolution</strong> → <span class="trac-field-new">wontfix</span> </li> </ul> Ticket