From: John Reid (j.reid_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-01 05:38:23
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:
> intermodule_holder performs a way more expensive static initialization
> process than static_holder (basically, it creates a shared memory
> area and interprocess mutex for communication between the different
> modules of the program. It only affects static initialization, though,
> the rest of operations (flyweight creation and passing around) are exactly
> the same as with static_holder.
> Another reason for not including this is that Boost.Interprocess (on which
> intermodule_holder depends) is not universally supported, so making
> intermodule_holder the default would complicate things for some
Perhaps this is worth documenting.
>>> * What is your evaluation of the documentation?
>> Extremely clearly written and well thought out. I would like to see more
>> explanation of the examples. I like the inclusion of the test code.
> Any particular example you wished you had more info about? I can
> try to improve that if you point me to the improvable parts.
All of them really, I was hoping to see some of the more important lines
of code briefly explained in the documentation.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk