[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160630134518.GB15995@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:45:18 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Issues when building libcxx libcxxabi with MUSL
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 03:38:40PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> [2016-06-30 15:15:47 +0200]:
> > * Julien Ramseier <j.ramseier@...il.com> [2016-06-30 14:50:14 +0200]:
> > > A workaround for the C++11 constexpr issue should land soon in libcxx trunk.
> > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D21637 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D21637>
> > >
> >
> > note that without pthread_mutex_destroy it may leak resources.
> >
>
> sorry libc++ uses pthread_mutex_destroy correctly
> (the ~mutex() definition is just in another file).
>
> there is still a nasty conformance issue that affects
> all c++ library implementations: the mutex and thread
> headers include <pthread.h>
They could at least reduce the dependency to sys/types.h with almost
no changes, I think. Better would be including just a proper-sized
buffer and initializing the mutex into it via code in its own TU, not
a public header file.
> it is not valid to include a posix header in c++ code,
> this pollutes the global namespace, might not have valid
> c++ syntax (posix headers are c99) and more importantly
> pthread types are visible through native_handle() which
> makes this impossible to fix.
That can be fixed just by removing them (existence of native handles
is optional).
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
