Re: [boost] [review] Fast track reviewofBoost.Utility/Singletonbegins today

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-18 15:06:36

Giovanni Piero Deretta:

...

> Don't you need a mutex in the slow path to prevent two threads that
> both find s_ps null to
> try initialize s_x withoug mutual exclusion? Or are you assuming C++0x
> thread safe
> initialization of statics? In the latter case, isn't safe to assume
> that the compiler will already use a form of the above pattern anyway?

Yes, I'm assuming thread-safe initialization of s_x for illustration 
purposes. Yes, I hope that the compiler will use the above pattern. I'm just 
showing the proof of concept.

> BTW, slightly off-topic, will C++0x standardize load dependent memory 
> barriers?
> According to the latest memory model paper, the then-current consensus
> was not to.

I'm not sure what happened to N2359-N2361. N2342 lists them as active.