From: Edd Dawson (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-08 13:07:19
Anthony Williams wrote:
>>> However, this still begs the question: why?
>> Win32 Fibers is my specific use-case. They're represented by pointers-to-void.
>> I'm currently using thread_specific_ptr<int> with a little casting here or
>> there. It works fine, but it just feels a little dirty.
> OK. The way thread_specific_ptr works, it is designed to store a pointer to the
> data you're really storing, so if you're storing a void*, you use
> thread_specific_ptr<void*>. Of course, this just adds an extra layer of
> complexity, and seems a bit daft if what you're storing IS a pointer.
Ah I see.
> I take it you're being careful to specify a suitable cleanup function, so your
> app doesn't try and use "delete" on your fiber handle.
Yes, I believe I was doing this part properly.
>> I don't know if you took a look at shared_ptr_traits<>, but the only trait in
>> there is "reference". It would be much simpler to do it this way than
>> the entire class, IMO.
> thread_specific_ptr itself isn't exactly complicated --- it just forwards
> everything to the backend functions. The specialization wouldn't require any
> change there.
Regardless, it doesn't seem worth it now that you've explained how my usage
isn't particularly idiomatic!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk