11 Jan
2013
11 Jan
'13
6:41 p.m.
Tim Blechmann wrote:
Is there any point in building a static Boost.Atomic library? I see why it'd be necessary to have the spinlock pool in its own DLL on Windows, but a static library doesn't seem to be adding anything. DLLs will still have separate copies of the spinlock pool. You might as well keep it header-only.
that's exactly the reason, why i suggested to build a shared library only. multi-module applications should *not* link to a static lib if they share atomic objects.
Isn't this only true on Windows? (Unless the spinlock pool has visibility=hidden, but it shouldn't).