From: Michael Glassford (glassfordm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-19 10:01:53
"Roland" <roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:04:07 -0500 Michael Glassford
> > For what it's worth, I'm hoping to investigate what it would take
> > make Boost.Thread support a static library option again in the
> > If such a thing ever happened (no promises), it would have to be a
> > version in which features that require the dll are disabled.
> Mike, this is a rather conservative estimate I think. As I already
> have tried to show you that this can be done without any
> omission of features at all. Altough at the price of the application
> creating a (hidden, temporary) file on the target machine.
> I am currently trying to create a local modification of the
> threading library with static linkage, that has full function.
You're absolutely right. The last couple of weeks have been so hectic
I temporarily forgot your interesting "pseudo-dll" solution, and I
apologize. Thanks for reminding me and and for working on it.
> I think I should send this to the list for discussion then.
> (BTW, the DLL version can be left totally unaltered.)
Please do! All my "Boost time" at the moment is spent answering posts
and preparing to move things from the thread_dev branch to the main
branch a piece at a time (after discussing each piece here first).
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk