From: Johan Nilsson (johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-06 02:07:13
"Roland" <roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:41:13 -0400 Michael Glassford
> > I've looked at this, and if I haven't missed anything the pe_tls.cpp
> > file is essentially the same as what you posted yesterday; the changes
> > are in config.hpp and jamfile. Is this correct?
> When my memory is correct, this is true. In either case I took it from my
> source I tested with.
> BTW.: while everything seems nice so far I just tried to use the thing
> MFC. It turns out that the process / thread init / term need even some
> While every destructor is getting called properly the debug version of MFC
> thinks it has discovered a memory leak. Since this will be able to make a
> user nervous, I am looking to a way to get rid of these messages (by
> the correct calling order).
I'm just throwing this out in case it might help, but you could take a look
at the documentation for #pragma init_seg ("lib" in particular). Sorry if
it's not applicable, but I don't have the time to go through details in the
Boost.Thread code right now.
I've used that myself to be able to properly track memory leaks using the
_CrtXxx functions without getting warnings for global static objects'
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk