home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: David Brownell <brownell@ix.netcom.com>
- Message-ID: <3173E95E.5AC@ix.netcom.com>
- X-Original-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 11:39:26 -0700
- Path: in1.uu.net!bounce-back
- Date: 16 Apr 96 18:46:53 GMT
- Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
- Newsgroups: comp.programming.threads,comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Is STL MT-Safe?
- Organization: Dave's VAX
- References: <4kmjvj$89t@usc.edu> <4kspmb$9tb@ubszh.fh.zh.ubs.com>
- X-Netcom-Date: Tue Apr 16 11:40:41 AM PDT 1996
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBFAgUBMXPrLeEDnX0m9pzZAQHDVQF/U3A72OTu4VbdDXqRzoUR0UJYIYV7YF6V
- TRYhZfyXjjSe2aEDeGa8TYp9wuKcVCqw
- =qSv0
-
- > I believe Modena or one of the other commercial STL library vendors has
- > added a certain degree of thread-awareness to their implementation. I
- > might be wrong, but I have a feeling that it is still not entirely
- > thread-safe.
-
- Someone else mentioned Rogue Wave. Does anyone have URLS or something
- through which the different "MT-enhanced" APIs could be compared? I've
- been organizing a collection of MT/C++ issues; one of the gaps is where
- the standard C++ library interfaces need to be "MT-safed" according to
- some useful and consistent policy.
-
- Eventually, the vendors ought to agree on one way to do threaded C++,
- but we're not there yet! I don't know how much commonality there is
- between different MT/C++ environments but I suspect it's not lots.
- --
- David Brownell
- http://www.netcom.com/~brownell
- ---
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles: try just posting with ]
- [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
- [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]
- [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
- [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]
-