Subject: Re: [boost] [Interprocess] Managed mapped file questions
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-13 17:52:57
El 13/12/2012 2:28, Jorge Lodos Vigil escribió:
> On 12/12/2012 7:07, Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
> Given that the mapped file content is not part of the library
> interface, and the only expected user of the mapped file is the
> library itself, why waste time in Windows? Seems to me that a
> requirement that files should be identical is too strong, as long as
> they work and perhaps don't affect platform portability. File
> portability between platforms should be warranted? What about
> platforms with different endianness?
I need to investigate it, but I tried to support similar behaviour for
internal file-handling functions. I'll need to think it again. Please
fill a ticket so this doesn't get lost when reviewing pending issues.
> Yes, the application crashes. I am mapping large complex containers
with different sizes, the crashes took place when I was developing
tests. I would expect an exception when the size of the mapping is not
Yes, that's the idea.
> It is time consuming to develop a structure that would need more
4Kb for its initial mapping. if I create a ticket with a sample using a
few bytes just to demonstrate the problem, would you consider it? I
understand this is not a show stopper :-)
This seems a bug, please fill another ticket with your example.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk