This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Is libstdcxx-time still experimental?
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 18:06:55 +0100
- Subject: Re: Is libstdcxx-time still experimental?
- References: <CAMe9rOpy1UNdyi=ftW+_PvSkaJ3gqrcbzXz9gfrrc8-frFhGYg@mail.gmail.com>
On Aug 26, 2012 4:17 PM, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> According to
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2010-04/msg00064.html
>
> One reason of --enable-libstdcxx-time=no on Linux is
> "not all users will want for an experimental c++0x mode."
> Is this feature still experimental today?
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2012-05/msg00085.html
I'm working on a patch to enable it by default and to define
this_thread::sleep_xxx and this_thread::yield unconditionally.
--enable-libstdcxx-time=rt is still needed for a high-resolution
std::system_clock and that causes unacceptable performance overhead in
single-threaded code, because clock_gettime needs librt which depends
on libpthread which causes libstdc++'s reference-counting to use
atomic operations.