Re: [sigc] Re: [gtkmm] libsigcx and gtkmm 2.4

[Martin Schulze <martin-ml hippogriff de>]

Am 14.06.2004 01:18:56 schrieb(en) Daniel Elstner:
> Am So, den 13.06.2004 um 23:47 Uhr +0200 schrieb Christer Palm:
>
> > 1. An string object is created.
> > 2. The shared mutex is locked.
> > 3. A shared copy of the string object is made.
> > 4. The mutex is unlocked.
> > 5. The original string object is destroyed.
> >
> > Now, the problem I see here is that the original string is  
> destroyed
>
> > after the mutex is unlocked. So if string isn't thread-safe this is
> a
> > problem.
>
> That's indeed another problem.

Hm... after reading:

 http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/faq/#5_6

I still cannot answer the question whether string (in the example from  
above) _is_ thread-safe?!

Regards,

 Martin


> > But if fail to see how locking the mutex before creating the
> original
> > string would make any difference. Successfully locking or unlocking
> a
> > mutex is guaranteed to synchronize memory with respect to other
> threads
> > regardless of whether that memory was touched before or after the
> mutex
> > was locked.
>
> That's new to me.  Do you have any reference on that?
>
> --Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtkmm-list mailing list
> gtkmm-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list