Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] "peer reviewed" - Rights and responsibilities of maintainers
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-18 09:35:40

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Alexander Grund
<alexander.grund_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Using static libs in shared libs is a recipe for disaster isn't it?
>> It's undefined behavior..
> Aren't shared libs per se undefined behavior? As far as I remember the

Implementation defined

> standard does not say much about them and it happens easily "in the wild":


> You might use Boost.Serialization yourself but also use a 3rd-party library
> which does use it for its own stuff.
>> Does it make sense to try to 'work around' it on specific implementations?
> This is exactly what is happening:
> Observed behavior on "specific implementations" is:
> - Destruction order on Windows+OSX is as expected, so no problems
> - On linux the order gets messed up. This gets detected by a dedicated

What does Linux 'say' about using static libs in shared libs?

> Hence the "work around" is to detect and handle this:

My point is that it might not make sense to work around this as other
issues are likely to pop up.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at