Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]
From: GMan (gmannickg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 17:02:49
Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> If you peel off the singleton aspect of singletons, you're left with global
> state and lazy initialization. A facility that supports thread-safe lazy
> initialization might be useful, but why tie it to global state (which is of
> more dubious value)?
Hm, good point. Perhaps there are three "levels" here:
1) Thread-safe, lazy initialized, general creation methods
2) 1 with global access
3) 2 with guaranteed same-instance access.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk