Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: "Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]" <rbv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:32:27 -0500
#5 at least is a sign of code with real bugs in it.
Oh, please. As I mentioned, being able to suppress interprocedural
optimization is a necessity for implementing mutex lock/unlock operations,
You use the volatile keyword for that, then you are robust against future
improvements in the optimizer.
and it also eliminates one of the problems in the DCLP. By putting
WaitForSingleObject, ReleaseMutex, and others in opaque system DLLs,
correct compiler behavior for MT programming WRT these operations
essentially comes for free.
Again, you use the volatile keyword for variables that are volatile. Trying
to get volatile behavior by changing to DLLs is bad.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- References:
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Ulrich Eckhardt
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Alexander Nickolov
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Alex Blekhman
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Ben Voigt [C++ MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- From: Doug Harrison [MVP]
- Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- Prev by Date: Re: solution name change
- Next by Date: Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- Previous by thread: Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- Next by thread: Re: Share .cpp and .h along projects
- Index(es):