Re: [Boost-users] Boost.Thread memory leak reported

From: Elisha Berns (e.berns_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-29 18:17:12

Peter Dimov wrote:

> It's not a question of microseconds. The "thread safe singleton"
pattern
> solves the initialization order problem. You want a particular object
to
> be
> available for the lifetime of the program, as if it was initialized
before
> everything else and destroyed after everything else.
> 
> C++ doesn't guarantee a particular initialization order for file scope
> objects in different translation units, so we have to resort to local
> statics or call_once.

I hear you, I hear the point.  I don't have a good solution to this, but
I hope someone does!