One more thing with regards to the boost libraries: the Internet related functions seem to make it quite easy to use ipv4 and ipv6 addresses on all the platforms.
So why not use the boost libraries? ---rony On 12.08.2021 15:43, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Thinking quite some time about this remark: > > On 04.07.2021 21:37, Rick McGuire wrote: >> When porting to new *ix environments, it is quite common for there to be >> problems getting the >> configuration for the semaphores to work correctly. From the stack trace, it >> is hanging on a >> request for a mutex semaphore. rexximage should run completely single >> threaded, so this should >> never deadlock. However, the semaphore in question is already held by the >> current thread because >> of a bit of recursion at startup, so It looks like the semaphores are not >> properly handling nested >> requests. > It seems that this and other problems that occur when porting to different > platforms would be > challenges for other projects as well. It is likely that over time > open-source solutions develop > that could be instrumentated for ooRexx as well. > > In C++ the Boost libraries [1], [2], [3], [4] have been playing an important > role, also in the C++ > standardization committee, which seems to pick sometimes Boost libraries as > reference > implementations. The Boost libraries are multi-platform so chances would be > that if there is a Boost > library for semaphores/mutexes that it is available for all operating systems > on which open-source > developers write software. > > Boost synchronization mechanisms [5] give an overview for the threads and > interprocess libraries > contained synchronization mechanisms: mutexes, conditions, semaphores, > sharable and upgradable > mutexes, lock transfers through move semantics, file locks, message queue. > > The question would be, if the ooRexx project would benefit by using boost > libraries, e.g. for the > semaphores. If the Boost libraries could be employed and would solve the > semaphore/mutex problem, > then maybe it helps ooRexx to be easier ported to other operating systems as > well? > > Could Boost solve this and related porting problems? > > ---rony > > P.S.: Looking further it seems that some developers have ported/tested the > boost libraries for > Android [6], [7]. [8] offers pre-built boost libraries (1.72 from 2020-01031, > 1.71 from 2019-10-18, > etc.). > > [1] Boost (C++ libraries): > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_(C%2B%2B_libraries)> > [2] Boost homepage: <https://www.boost.org/> > [3] Boost background information: <https://www.boost.org/users/> > [4] Boost download page: <https://www.boost.org/users/download/> > [5] Boost synchronization mechanisms: > <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/doc/html/interprocess/synchronization_mechanisms.html> > [6] Boost for Android: <http://silverglint.com/boost-for-android/> > [7] Boost for Android github: <https://github.com/dec1/Boost-for-Android> > [8] Some pre-built Boost for Android releases: > <https://github.com/dec1/Boost-for-Android/releases> > > _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
