Re: Thread calls

[ Available lists | Index of freebsd-hackers | Month of Sep 1998 | Week of 2 Sep 1998 | Raw email | View thread | Wrap long lines | Reply | Tag ]
From
Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Date
2 Sep 1998 01:17:32
Subject
Re: Thread calls
Message-ID
XFMail.980902174609.doconnor@gsoft.com.au

In reply to

[ Hide this part ]
 
On 02-Sep-98 John Birrell wrote:
> > ability to easily check between standards? ie is there a good reason to not
> > back that change out until a more comprehensive set of patches comes along?
> I don't agree with Terry's assessment of Draft 10 vs Draft 4 issues
> in libc_r. AFAIK, the interfaces there are 1003.1c, and they exercise
> the POSIX standard clause: "either it shall be implemented like this or
> not implemented". Too many threaded programs assume that all the optional
> functions are supposed to be implemented.
OK, I did not know this. (yeah yeah.. I didn't do any research on it :)
It sounds like it has turned into a defacto standard for determining the thread
version on the system though :(

> Just because you read it in a message on a mailing list doesn't make it
> true.
Thats true, but my experience with threaded programs is kind of limited, so I
am forced to take advice from other people :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
|Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software |
|http://www.gsoft.com.au |
|The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to|
|choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum |
---------------------------------------------------------------------


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message


Elapsed time: 0.355 seconds