TR library extensions

Martin Sebor sebor@roguewave.com
Tue Oct 7 19:31:00 GMT 2003


Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

...
> If they are interchangeable then that is a guarantee not made by
> us, but by your system. Full stop.  That is not FUD.  That is a fact
> you can verify.

No, but suggesting that using something perfectly safe and in wide
use might actually lead to bugs is, especially in the absence of
reliable documentation on the subject and even more so when coming
from a maintainer of the project.

> 
> The FUD is *you* making people into believing that we support use  a
> different thread model than the one use at configuration time. 

I made no claims about anything being guaranteed or supported -- I
used the two options as an example of a feature that has been known
to work. Coming from a user rather than a maintainer of the compiler
it can hardly be described as FUD -- it was just an observation.

Incidentally, though, this patch and thread seem to suggest that the
goal at one point was to provide support for both options with the
same compiler: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1997-09/msg01087.html

If the patch was accepted and is still in gcc today it would be
a service to gcc users if this functionality were documented.
Doing so would answer a lot of people's questions. See for
example

   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-07n/msg00467.html
   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2000-06/msg00113.html
   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-02/msg00470.html
   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2001-03/msg00589.html
   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2002-07/msg00249.html

Martin




More information about the Libstdc++ mailing list