Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #7934

Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe

From Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.std.c, comp.lang.c
Subject Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe
Date 2011-07-08 16:24 +1200
Message-ID <97nf4oF6tbU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <iv422a$33k$1@speranza.aioe.org> <97m59uF1nsU1@mid.individual.net> <97mluqFbcvU6@mid.individual.net> <97ndh8F5p5U1@mid.individual.net>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 07/ 8/11 03:58 PM, Wojtek Lerch wrote:
> On 07/07/2011 5:14 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> On 07/ 8/11 04:31 AM, Wojtek Lerch wrote:
>>> On 07/07/2011 6:33 AM, jacob navia wrote:
>>> ....
>>>> 2) The proposed functions are absurd.
>>>> ... so it is impossible to use.
>>>
>>> Do you find fopen() absurd and impossible to use too? Or are file or
>>> stream attributes (such as the POSIX permission bits, or O_EXCL) less
>>> important to you than some of the thread attributes that POSIX or
>>> Windows have?
>>
>> Is really an appropriate analogy? Using fopen or open is an
>> implementation detail whereas the choice of thread implementation is a
>> pretty fundamental design decision.
>
> Really?  I have written a lot of code using vanilla pthread_create() etc
> without setting any attributes to override any defaults of my threads,
> mutexes, or condvars; converting that code to the new C API would be
> purely a matter of mechanically renaming things.  On some other
> occassions, I did use some of the POSIX features that are absent int the
> C1X draft, and probably in many of those cases converting my code to C1X
> would require some non-trivial redesigning.  But I can say all the above
> about the C99 and POSIX file APIs -- choosing an API that supports
> directories, allows accessing unlinked files, and lets you control
> permissions can for sure impace the design compared to having to
> restrict your code to using the simplistic C99 file API.

Yes I agree with the above as I wrote later in my post.  In most cases 
the new API will save passing a NULL for the default action!  The 
pthreads feature I'll miss most is process shared, which is why I said 
it is important for standard and native threads to be compatible under 
the hood.

-- 
Ian Collins

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-07 12:33 +0200
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Juha Niskanen <juniskan@paju.oulu.fi.nospam> - 2011-07-07 12:46 +0000
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 13:12 +0000
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-07 17:11 +0200
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2011-07-08 09:23 -0400
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 15:20 +0000
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe "christian.bau" <christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-07 07:36 -0700
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-07 17:09 +0200
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-07 18:00 +0200
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-07 18:20 +0200
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Wojtek Lerch <wojtek_l@yahoo.ca> - 2011-07-07 12:31 -0400
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-07 09:40 -0700
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Wojtek Lerch <wojtek_l@yahoo.ca> - 2011-07-07 14:42 -0400
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 12:03 -0700
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-07 19:27 +0000
            Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 12:55 -0700
              Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-07-07 20:13 +0000
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-08 09:14 +1200
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Wojtek Lerch <wojtek_l@yahoo.ca> - 2011-07-07 23:58 -0400
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-08 16:24 +1200
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-08 12:14 +0200
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-10 00:02 +0200
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-10 14:47 +0200
            Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-11 21:05 +0200
              Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-11 22:50 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-11 23:56 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-12 07:50 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-16 01:14 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-16 10:08 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-07-18 11:11 +0900
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-18 21:50 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-19 08:36 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-21 11:56 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-22 20:31 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-22 21:36 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-07-23 10:50 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-23 20:29 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard... Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-08-03 15:50 +0200
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-07 23:07 +0200
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-07 23:32 +0200
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jameskuyper <jameskuyper@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 15:25 -0700
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe sfuerst <svfuerst@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 16:12 -0700
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-07 22:41 -0400
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe "Chris M. Thomasson" <cristom@charter.net> - 2011-07-08 12:47 -0700
            Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe sfuerst <svfuerst@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 13:11 -0700
              Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe "Chris M. Thomasson" <cristom@charter.net> - 2011-07-08 16:56 -0700
              Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Marcin Grzegorczyk <mgrzegor@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-07-09 23:55 +0200
                Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe sfuerst <svfuerst@gmail.com> - 2011-07-09 18:40 -0700
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-07 23:32 -0500
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2011-07-08 10:09 -0400
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 10:31 -0400
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 00:38 -0400
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-08 17:10 +1200
    Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-08 07:46 -0400
      Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-08 23:52 +1200
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-08 08:23 -0400
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-07-08 14:54 +0200
          Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-09 08:26 +1200
        Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-07-08 14:47 +0000
  Re: The threading specs in the standard: a new catastrophe Juha Niskanen <juniskan@paju.oulu.fi.nospam> - 2011-07-08 07:52 +0000

csiph-web