------- Comment #8 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-10-02 21:21 ------- Subject: Re: solaris vs. __gthread_active_p
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > However, there is a bigger issue involved, which is still in progress. > Actually, > I'd like to broaden this out a bit since it looks like we are thinking of > solving a related issue on linux as well. (See RH bugzilla, link below) > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165728 > > Therefore, I'm suggesting I close this, and open a more general enhancement > bug. Sure, that sounds fine. My opinion is that, even if it means a small performance hit, we should move the weak declarations of pthread_* out of headers that can be included in user code. I understand that would be an ABI change, but you're working on a new libstdc++ ABI, so you could do it there. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24071
