Re: [boost] "peer reviewed" - Rights and responsibilities of maintainers

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":

True

> 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.

-- 
Olaf