RE: [boost] Re: multi threading support

From: Matthew Hurd (matthurd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-05-31 10:42:29

Hello,

Fair enough.  A Singleton is certainly worthwhile.  It's just a matter of
how far to go.  What is the answer to thread safety?

Is it documentation, caveat emptor?  Is it #define BOOST_MT?  Is it policy
abstraction in the code?

Is it worth worrying about?  Should Boost care about this?

I like the idea of a boostified distributed library with locking, etc;
including support for singletons with optional thread safety.  It would be
useful to my weary self.

cheers,

matt.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Abrahams [mailto:abrahams_at_[hidden]]
Sent: Thursday, 1 June 2000 1:05
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: [boost] Re: multi threading support

--- In boost_at_[hidden], "Matthew Hurd" <matthurd_at_o...> wrote:

> Note:  ACE contains the double-check patterned solution to the
Singleton
> thread safety question as referenced (in a John Vlissides link) in a
> previous post.  Bottom line is Singleton is not too useful without
thread
> safety.

I have written hundreds of single-threaded programs which needed a
singleton.

-Dave