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.