[PATCH] [config] Disable threads on Carbon, since MPTasks aren't supported

Disable threads on Carbon, since MPTasks aren't supported Boost.Thread hasn't supported MPTasks since 1.33.1. Prevent the definition of BOOST_HAS_THREADS in the non-pthreads case so spinlocks compile (which are needed for smart pointers).

Disable threads on Carbon, since MPTasks aren't supported
Boost.Thread hasn't supported MPTasks since 1.33.1. Prevent the definition of BOOST_HAS_THREADS in the non-pthreads case so spinlocks compile (which are needed for smart pointers).
Joshua, Just checking, but are you building with the Metrowerks compiler and the MSL std lib? I'm asking because I don't see anything that would ever define BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in that particular case. Thanks, John.

On Mar 8, 2011, at 8:48 AM, John Maddock wrote:
Disable threads on Carbon, since MPTasks aren't supported
Boost.Thread hasn't supported MPTasks since 1.33.1. Prevent the definition of BOOST_HAS_THREADS in the non-pthreads case so spinlocks compile (which are needed for smart pointers).
Just checking, but are you building with the Metrowerks compiler and the MSL std lib?
Yes, but be aware that I'm developing a POSIX-like environment that runs over classic Mac (MacRelix[1]), which overrides MSL and adds its own library calls as necessary. It's also conceivable that MacRelix's userspace library might eventually replace MSL completely.
I'm asking because I don't see anything that would ever define BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in that particular case.
Not yet, but I intend to implement pthreads in the future for user programs in MacRelix. If you prefer to just remove the line defining BOOST_HAS_THREADS instead, that's fine. I don't have strong feelings about it. Josh [1] Formerly called Lamp (Lamp ain't Mac POSIX).

I'm asking because I don't see anything that would ever define BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in that particular case.
Not yet, but I intend to implement pthreads in the future for user programs in MacRelix.
If you prefer to just remove the line defining BOOST_HAS_THREADS instead, that's fine. I don't have strong feelings about it.
OK committed to Trunk. Thanks, John.

On Mar 10, 2011, at 3:10 AM, John Maddock wrote:
I'm asking because I don't see anything that would ever define BOOST_HAS_PTHREADS in that particular case. Not yet, but I intend to implement pthreads in the future for user programs in MacRelix. If you prefer to just remove the line defining BOOST_HAS_THREADS instead, that's fine. I don't have strong feelings about it.
OK committed to Trunk.
I see that my other patch is also applied, via <https://github.com/ryppl/boost-svn/commit/605cb6e5429c2c5753f5dcd435c0ec49ea...
.
Thanks! Josh
participants (2)
-
John Maddock
-
Joshua Juran