Are there any moves afoot to make libstdc++ thread safe

[John Allen]

Phil Edwards wrote:
On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 06:29:46PM +0000, John Allen
wrote:
> john.allen@online.ie wrote:
>
> > I'd be more than willing to get involved in making the GNU STD
C++
> > library thread safe.
>
> OK, no response, probably no interest.
We just get busy at times.  There is a great deal of interest in
making
libstdc++-v3 threadsafe.  Just look over the archives of this
mailing list,
especially for the phrase "--enable-threads".
> I am going to proceed with a minimalist mutex, and atomic integer
> class for use in libstdc++
If that's the area you want to work on, please see the files in config,
config/cpu, and config/os for how this is being done.
However...
> I have already patched bstring.* to be thread safe.
...it looks like you're working on the wrong library.  The old
library,
libstdc++-v2, used bastring.  What's more, -v2 is not standard-compliant
and nobody is going to improve it.  The library for this list
is -v3,
and is completely new.  Does that clear things up?
 
I'm gettting the CVS repository at the moment, so I'll look over it
over the
weekend. Certainly the old bastring.* has been the bane of my
life for the
past year, and I will consider it very important for my future frameworks
to have a thread safe libstdc++.
 
Phil
--
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot
redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot
domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable
fools.

-- 
John Allen                         email: john.allen@oceanfree.net
OpenSource Developer                    : john.allen@online.ie
                                     www: http://www.vptk.org
                                   phone: intl+353-14937616
                                        : intl+353-862315986
ÂÂ