From b86ee4a56ded8c3a4090f7eff5b3efd0f95e4bde Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Loren J. Rittle"
The libstdc++ code (all of it, not just the containers) has been @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ portable to all platforms. A minor problem that pops up every so often is different interpretations of what "thread-safe" means for a library (not a general program). We currently use the - same + same definition that SGI uses for their STL subset.
A recent journal article has described "atomic integer @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@
Comments and suggestions are welcome, and may be sent to
the mailing list.
-
$Id: howto.html,v 1.1 2000/12/10 04:03:09 pme Exp $
+
$Id: howto.html,v 1.2 2001/04/03 00:26:54 pme Exp $
An excellent page to read when working with templatized containers - and threads is - SGI's - http://www.sgi.com/Technology/STL/thread_safety.html. The +
Two excellent pages to read when working with templatized containers + and threads are + SGI's + http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/thread_safety.html and + SGI's + http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/Allocators.html. The libstdc++-v3 uses the same definition of thread safety when discussing design. A key point that beginners may miss is the - fourth major paragraph ("For most clients,"...), pointing + fourth major paragraph of the first page mentioned above + ("For most clients,"...), pointing out that locking must nearly always be done outside the container, by client code (that'd be you, not us *grin*).
@@ -236,7 +239,7 @@
Comments and suggestions are welcome, and may be sent to
the mailing list.
-
$Id: howto.html,v 1.1 2000/12/10 04:04:55 pme Exp $
+
$Id: howto.html,v 1.2 2001/04/03 00:26:55 pme Exp $