Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <010101c2205f$669c81b0$6132bc3e@BABEL>
From: "Conrad Scott" <Conrad DOT Scott AT dsl DOT pipex DOT com>
To: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <001901c21eee$8aadf060$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <034301c21f49$a989f6e0$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <002e01c21fca$f0b19560$1800a8c0 AT LAPTOP> <004401c22031$7f167620$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <20020630163635 DOT GA32201 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: Threads and the C++ new and delete operators
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 18:56:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

"Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
> You may notice that cygwin does not use new/delete very much.  This
is
> one of the reasons why.

Ahh. Okay.

So, to be *completely* thread-safe (until gcc 3.1), I should avoid any
use of new and delete in multi-threaded programs (unless I can confine
it to one thread)? And that implies no use of any C++ classes that
might themselves use new and delete (e.g. iostreams)? This is no big
deal and I'm most of the way there already (i.e. there's no explicit
use of new/delete now in cygserver).

BTW I'm not being facetious here or anything, just checking the score.
It's been a slightly stressful few days narrowing this one down and
I'm getting paranoid.

Thanks,

// Conrad