Re: [boost] Re: Re: Re: Threads Rewrite?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-28 05:59:12

Bronek Kozicki wrote:

> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>
>> 64KB? We had a code which worked by creating such table, and after 
>> upgrade
>> to NPTL is started throwing "out of memory" errors when resizing this 
>> table
>
>
> NTPL == Native Posix Thread Library? 

Yes.

> I think that we are seeking for a way to avoid shortcomings of native 
> Win32 thread local storage, not Posix one. Maybe NTPL does not need 
> such workarounds?

Probably I misunderstood your previous posts, but it sounded like you 
say that TSS is not needed at
all, and should be replaced with singletons and hand-crafted thread-id 
-> instance mapping. I believe
that on Linux, using provided TSS facilities is better, and so I need 
thread_specific_ptr. And to write
portable code, that class should be present everywhere.

Now, do you propose that thread_specific_ptr implementation is changed 
to use hand-crafted mapping? How that will help with cleanup issues?

- Volodya