Re: [boost] [fusion] sequence io manipulators

Subject: Re: [boost] [fusion] sequence io manipulators
From: Eric Niebler (eniebler_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-03-26 16:01:53

On 13-03-26 10:46 AM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> AMDG
> 
> On 03/26/2013 10:03 AM, Jeff Flinn wrote:
>>
>> I have not addressed possible issues with "static int index =
>> std::ios::xalloc();" thread safety. gcc at least appears to guard this
>> initialization with a mutex. I'm not sure what the standard guarantees
>> in this regard pre/post C++11. Comments would be appreciated.
> 
> C++11 guarantees that function statics are
> thread safe.  C++03 doesn't.

Right. And IIRC, different versions of different compilers implemented
that C++11 feature at different times, so it can't really be relied on
in portable code. Yet.

-- 
Eric Niebler
Boost.org