Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » U++ TheIDE » U++ TheIDE: Other Features Wishlist and/or Bugs » bug in latest svn
Re: bug in latest svn [message #15668 is a reply to message #15667] Sat, 03 May 2008 19:17 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
Novo wrote on Sat, 03 May 2008 17:42

Novo wrote on Fri, 02 May 2008 16:15


Hopefully, I’ll submit a patch at the end of the day.



Sorry, couldn't keep my promice.

I probably miss something, but code below always was a problem.

const String& GetCppFile(int i)
{
	INTERLOCKED_(cpp_file_mutex) {
		return cpp_file[i];
	}
	return String();
}


Should be something like that:

const String& GetCppFile(int i)
{
	INTERLOCKED_(cpp_file_mutex) {
		return cpp_file[i];
	}

        static String value;
	return value;
}



I'm not sure about thread-safety of static variable initialization though.



AFAIK that's a right behaviour, as returned temporary string is firs assigned to result and then deleted. With static variables you loose reentrancy (usually).

BTW, after long debugging I couldn't locate the problem....

Max

 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Some lack of features
Next Topic: [BUG] Ide loses "maximized" setting on minimize
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon May 13 11:24:41 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02497 seconds