------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-05-02 17:17 ------- Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | ------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-02 17:01 ------- | > You probably got the mail about users saying that he read on C++ | > newsgroups that V3-s implementation of std::string is known to be | > avoided in multi-threaded programs. | | Whereas I'm all for providing alternate memory management policies (we are I don't quite understand why you want to see this issue as a memory management policy issue, as opposed to a thread safety issue. | very close to that in the v7-branch and I promise further progress during | the next months) I fail to properly appreciate the actual details of this issue: | which applications are actually penalized, which are the alternatives, something | more concrete, in other terms, that a vague reference to those "position" papers | that we all know, in other terms ;) (and one of those I'd like to discuss | in detail...) Maybe James can help here. In practice, we could, for instance, I don't quite understand what "position papers" you're talking about. Could you give references to them to clarify the issue? | *within the current ABI*, provide a switch to disable completely reference | counting, would that be appreciated? I can implement this very quickly but I'd | like to have some evidence that a non-trivial number of users would appreciate | that short-term solution. That would be indeed, a short term solution, because | a library relying purely on a non-refcounted string has subtle issues with | memory allocation during exceptions, that definitely we don't want in a long | term solution: if nobody has got a better idea, I'm afraid we have to implement | also a separate ref-counted mini-string for usage in exceptions. What are those subtle issues with memory management during exceptions? As far as I can tell, V3 is the only one that insists on COW. Why is it that others don't have those "subtle issues"? -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334
