libstdc++/16612, empty basic_strings can't live in shared memory

[Nathan Myers]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 09:27:37PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> However, as Nathan wrote, "let's not be  hasty": it's the first time
> in *years* that someone notices this problem, and I still have hopes
> there is an even better solution: operator[] is such a *basic*
> operation and would be *so* sad adding a conditional...

Not to mention that length(), capacity(), and (really) everything
else besides would need the same treatment.

I like the idea of using static space in libsupc++.  It's simpler,
and should improve performance of the plain vanilla string, too, by 
avoiding relocation indirections.  Can anybody say whether it could 
be arranged for static storage in libsupc++ to appear at the same 
address in all programs compiled for a given ABI version?

Nathan Myers
ncm-nospam@cantrip.org