https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6218 <p> Currently there are some differences between Boost.Thread and Boost.Interprocess concerning the synchronization interfaces. </p> <p> The following references could be taken as a base to choose the final names <a class="ext-link" href="http://home.roadrunner.com/~hinnant/bloomington/shared_mutex.html"><span class="icon">​</span>Shared locking in C++ - Howard Hinnant proposal draft</a> and <a class="ext-link" href="http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2094.html"><span class="icon">​</span>N2094 Multithreading API for C++0X - A Layered Approach</a>. </p> <p> This is surely a big task that could be split in smaller tasks or feature requests. E.g. we could have two non-shared and shared synchronization. </p> en-us /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6218 Trac 1.4.3 Ion Gaztañaga Thu, 30 Jun 2016 20:25:31 GMT https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6218#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/6218#comment:1 <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> <p> Closing this old bug as it was interest from users. </p> Ticket