Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2016 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 12/09/2016 04:04 AM, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Just a quick inquiry on whether we should continue to stick with
osl::Mutex or, since now that we have C++11 as the baseline, we could
perhaps switch to using std::mutex instead.

As always with new C++ features:

* Start a test balloon commit to see that the stuff indeed works with all our toolchains. (I'd very much assume that's the case for std::mutex; e.g., Michael introduced a commit using std::mutex and std::condition_variable the other day.)

* Keep the URE interface at C++03. (Which typically isn't much of a burden. For one, backwards compatibility requirements preclude much change anyway. And for another, compatible additions can be wrapped in LIBO_INTERNAL_ONLY---which has the added benefit of not needing to set things into stone prematurely.)

One big benefit of std::mutex over osl::Mutex is that it's non-recursive by default, which is generally the saner choice.

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.