On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:41:13 -0400 Michael Glassford <glassfordm@hotmail.com> wrote:
I've looked at this, and if I haven't missed anything the pe_tls.cpp file is essentially the same as what you posted yesterday; the changes are in config.hpp and jamfile. Is this correct?
When my memory is correct, this is true. In either case I took it from my latest source I tested with.
BTW.: while everything seems nice so far I just tried to use the thing with MFC. It turns out that the process / thread init / term need even some more tweeking. While every destructor is getting called properly the debug version of MFC still thinks it has discovered a memory leak. Since this will be able to make a
"Roland" <roland.schwarz@chello.at> wrote in message news:20040805160547.ICDA9307.viefep19-int.chello.at@speedsnail... potential
user nervous, I am looking to a way to get rid of these messages (by finding the correct calling order).
I'm just throwing this out in case it might help, but you could take a look at the documentation for #pragma init_seg ("lib" in particular). Sorry if it's not applicable, but I don't have the time to go through details in the Boost.Thread code right now. I've used that myself to be able to properly track memory leaks using the _CrtXxx functions without getting warnings for global static objects' leaking. // Johan