[lldb-dev] [PATCH] Minor lldb_private::ModuleList fixes
piotr.rak at gmail.com
Mon Mar 24 12:26:07 PDT 2014
2014-03-24 20:23 GMT+01:00 Todd Fiala <tfiala at google.com>:
> > For future:
> > Are there any clear guidelines what feature set form C++11 is safe to
> > Or we shouldn't limit ourselves until someone starts screaming out laud?
> I think the LLVM dev list had some guidelines on this in the last 2 or 3
> months as they moved to a C++11 required stance. That might be worth
> having a look at.
Thank you, I'll look for it.
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Piotr Rak <piotr.rak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2014-03-24 17:58 GMT+01:00 Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com>:
>> Note that std::once can be used to enforce "run once" and we don't have
>>> to worry about each platform (like we would have to if we used
>>> Modified version submitted with:
>>> Author: gclayton
>>> Date: Mon Mar 24 11:50:33 2014
>>> New Revision: 204622
>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=204622&view=rev
>>> Modified patch from Piotr Rak that makes GetSharedModuleList() more
>>> thread safe and also fixed a missed member initialization on the copy
>>> contractor and also makes the assignment operator safer.
>> Thanks, that's great we can use that, I have not seen any use of
>> std::once, and that's why I was avoiding it.
>> Like I avoided ranged version of for before I have noticed we already use
>> I've seen comments about lack of atomic for Windows in debug shared_ptr
>> implementation, and also we wrap things like mutex, condition variable,
>> For future:
>> Are there any clear guidelines what feature set form C++11 is safe to use?
>> Or we shouldn't limit ourselves until someone starts screaming out laud?
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Todd Fiala | Software Engineer | tfiala at google.com | 650-943-3180
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lldb-dev