------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-05-02 13:27 ------- Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Two quick comments: 1- I'd like to keep open either 10350 or this | one, I don't see much value in keeping open both. I don't see much value in discarding either of them. Both provide complimentary information and analysis. Whatever you do, do make sure that none of them disappear. I would have preference to keep this one open because it raises another question regarding our documentation. | Ok? 2- I'm not aware of any real cure for | this kind of problems within a RC implementation. Are you? Beside death to COW? ;-> | For what is worth, | in the v7-branch there is already a basic_string framework for flexible memory | management policies and I have already prototyped an additional policy not using | RC at all. I'm planning to add it the repository very soon. This is stuff that | breaks the 3.4/4.0 ABI of course, but if people want it we can envisage providing | it as an extension in future 4.0.x releases. -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334
