I am using WinXP (actually, a cluster of up to 25 machines) with .NET 7.1. Occasionally on Linux but the XP cluster is the primary target.
Also, I remember reading somewhere that optimizers cannot do some optimizations on dlls.
I would be quite happy with very basic threading (ie only that offered in the thread class) as a static lib. The rest is certainly not essential.
Some of the other posts mentioned not liking RTL dlls because of deployment headaches (in high volume).
Boost seems to be such a nice effort, it would be a real shame if
I'm working on supporting static linking in Boost.Threads. Have you determined why the statically linked version runs so much faster? Mike "Peter Danford" <pdanford_qed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:20040601230327.7391.qmail@web60603.mail.yahoo.com... they decide to not support high end users. As is stands now, the Threads not offering a static subset means we cannot use it because the computational hit is enormous on XP platforms.
I will try the below suggestion to see the difference on Linux, but
if it is true some optimizations are not available on shared libs, it may still be problematic.
Peter
Trey Jackson <tjackson@ichips.intel.com> wrote:
Some of the software I develop deals with different types of
analysis
(such as scientific and financial). The runs can take as much as 20 hours to complete. If I do nothing but change to link with dynamic RTL, the run time is increased on average of 35%. This means and additional 7 hours of run time! So dynamic RTL is really undesirable.
You didn't mention what OS/compiler you are using.
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost