Re: [boost] [thread] A few submissions

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] A few submissions
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-04 16:28:58

On 05.07.2010 0:11, Stefan Strasser wrote:
> Zitat von "vicente.botet" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>:
>
>>> A few notes up-front. There are extensions in some compilers for TLS
>>> support. It offers even better performance and easier to use. Also,
>>> C++0x will bring this feature into the language. But:
>>> * It is known to have problems with dynamically-loaded modules.
>>> * It is not portable. Even when C++0x it out, not all compilers will
>>> support it right away.
>>> * thread_specific does not require the variable to have a static storage
>>> duration.
>>
>> Stefan Stasser has proposed a stati_thread_specific_ptr (see attached
>> file). What about a static_thread_specific that could be implemented
>> using the C++0x thread_local, when available?
>
> I use a static_thread_specific_ptr in namespace detail because I only
> needed static TSS, but I don't propose adding this as a public interface
> to boost.
> a better implementation of the existing thread_specific_ptr interface
> can be almost as efficient as static_thread_specific_ptr. there is one
> additional indirection (two in the prototype implementation), but it is
> just as efficient as thread_local otherwise.

How do you work around the problem with delay loaded dlls?