Boost logo

Boost :

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-11-12 13:22:22


--- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> From: "Steve Anichini" <sanichin_at_2...>
> > Hence why I'm lobbying that a) linking with the static runtime is
not
> > inherently unsafe
>
> ... and is sometimes the only option when the DLL and the EXE are
built by
> different compilers. DLLs are supposed to "just work" regardless of
which
> compiler has been used to build them.

Which is simply not possible with C++. C++ DLLs are compiler
specific.

> > and b) it is something Boost.threads should support "out
> > of the box".
>
> Probably true, although Boost.Threads' case is slightly different.
It's not
> about the C RTL; the whole Boost.Threads has to be a DLL when both
the EXE
> and a DLL use it. Otherwise the EXE and the DLL will have their own
separate
> thread locals.

Yes, but not all applications will use both DLLs and an EXE that use
TLS. This was my reasoning initially as well, but I'm being swayed
to at least let the user shoot themselves in the foot here.

> In this case threadmon.dll should probably be integrated into
> boost.threads.dll.

This is being worked on.

Bill Kempf


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk