[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       apache-stdcxx-dev
Subject:    Re: svn commit: r713762 - /stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h
From:       Martin Sebor <msebor () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-11-15 18:33:25
Message-ID: 491F15F5.1030906 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to give users the ability to
decide whether to enable TLS in case they don't need LoadLibrary()
or not. What do you think?

Martin

faridz@apache.org wrote:
> Author: faridz
> Date: Thu Nov 13 09:57:50 2008
> New Revision: 713762
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=713762&view=rev
> Log:
> 2008-11-13  Farid Zaripov  <faridz@apache.org>
> 
> 	STDCXX-1023
> 	* include/rw/_config.h [_WIN32 && _RWSTD_LIB_SRC]: Disable
> 	using of implicit TLS variables in stdcxx library on Windows.
> 
> Modified:
> stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h
> 
> Modified: stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h?rev=713762&r1=713761&r2=713762&view=diff
>  ==============================================================================
> --- stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h (original)
> +++ stdcxx/branches/4.2.x/include/rw/_config.h Thu Nov 13 09:57:50 2008
> @@ -278,6 +278,18 @@
> #ifdef _WIN32
> #  define _RWSTD_NO_STATIC_MUTEX_INIT
> #  define _RWSTD_PATH_SEP '\\'
> +#  ifdef _RWSTD_LIB_SRC
> +     // Don't use implicit TLS in our library on Windows because of the TLS
> +     // might not be initialized when our library DLL or the DLL, that
> +     // linked statically against our library, is loaded explicitly using
> +     // LoadLibrary() function. (STDCXX-1023)
> +#    ifndef _RWSTD_NO_TLS
> +#      define _RWSTD_NO_TLS
> +#    endif
> +#    ifdef _RWSTD_THREAD
> +#      undef _RWSTD_THREAD
> +#    endif
> +#  endif   // _RWSTD_LIB_SRC
> #endif   // _WIN32
> 
> #ifndef _RWSTD_PATH_SEP
> 
> 
> 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]