2012/5/9 Gabriel Dos Reis <[email protected]>: > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Wakely <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 7 May 2012 18:35, K. Frank wrote: >>> Hello Ruben and Gabriel! >> >> N.B. I'm not on the mingw lists, so please keep me CC'd if you want >> responses or any help from me in enhancing libstdc++ to work better on >> Windows. >> >> >>> And my P.S.: As I mentioned in my earlier post, I have been using Ruben's >>> <thread>-enabled build, and it passes all of my tests. So the approach of >>> sticking with the winpthreads implementation of <thread> and directing >>> any available manpower to fixing and/or improving it rather than to building >>> a separate implementation seems on the surface sensible. >> >> The C++11 thread library exposes native OS handle via the >> "native_handle()" member functions. A <thread> implementation based >> on Windows thread primitives would allow mixing std::thread with >> WaitForMultipleObjects, which may be preferable to people who want to >> use mingw's std::thread and combine it with their own code. I don't >> know if such people exist, I never use Windows except to run Putty to >> connect to GNU/Linux hosts. If no mingw users care about >> --enable-threads=win32 and don't want a new --enable-threads=win64 >> then yes, just using --enable-threads=posix and winpthreads seems >> sensible. I guess that's a decision for the mingw maintainers. >> >> If however, users want --enable-threads=win32, then my first >> suggestion seems like a reasonable way to give them a better >> experience than they have today. > > We do not seem to have Win32 and Win64 maintainers on the libstdc++ > side. That is why I forwarded your message to the WinGW-64 list. > (We do have maintainers on the compiler side; and they are on the > MinGW-64 list :-) > I use Win64 on my windows machines, for some of my programs, but I am > far from an accomplished Windows programmer and I know just > enough to be dangerous so I can't take on a Win64 port role. > However, I do believe a clean Win64 API for C++11 thread is desirable. > > -- Gaby
Hi, The cause why I am not that happy about K.Frank's Vista+ "conditionalvariable" API suggestion is that this API isn't backward compatible. Therefore "win64" as threading-model looks wrong to me, as it has nothing to do with 64-bit, it is just a OS related API. Well, introducing here a new thread-model "win64" - we need here a different name for it - might be still interesting for some of our mingw users. It would avoid the additional dependency of libgcc to posix-threading-DLL. Regards, Kai ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
