no free functions?!This is a discussion on no free functions?! within the Eiffel forums in Programming Languages category; Georg Bauhaus <see.reply.to @ maps.futureapps.de> writes: [...] >[*] errno is just a good example for the more general shared > variable that needs protection from concurrent access. It hadn't > always been a matter of course for a C library to be thread > safe! Actually "errno" must be a thread-local variable to make any sense. Any OS-call has to be serialized, and only after errno is "safed", thread execution can continue. Thus it's still an argument against "static" routines... Ulrich... | ||||||||
| | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
#11
05-29-2008, 04:16 AM
| |||
| |||
 Re: no free functions?! Georg Bauhaus <see.reply.to@maps.futureapps.de> writes: [...] >[*] errno is just a good example for the more general shared > variable that needs protection from concurrent access. It hadn't > always been a matter of course for a C library to be thread > safe! Actually "errno" must be a thread-local variable to make any sense. Any OS-call has to be serialized, and only after errno is "safed", thread execution can continue. Thus it's still an argument against "static" routines... Ulrich  |
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14 AM.
