Subject: Re: [boost] Thread-safe singleton pattern
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 07:26:24
Alex Miller wrote:
> Your implementation seems to be a fairly standard implementation of double
> checked locking, and thus is likely vulnerable to the issues outlined in C++
> and the Perils of Double-Checked
Making Singleton is a kind of Sisyphus labour.
I'm wondering if Monostate would be a better candidate for such project.
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk