Re: [boost] [fusion] sequence io manipulators

Subject: Re: [boost] [fusion] sequence io manipulators
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-03-26 19:40:56

On 26/03/13 21:01, Eric Niebler wrote:
> 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.

GCC has implemented it for a long time, since before it was standardized.
MSVC still doesn't implement it.