Subject: Re: Pthreads, libc, and the future
To: Michael Richardson <email@example.com>
From: Michael Graff <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/13/1999 14:19:05
Michael Richardson <email@example.com> writes:
> No, I don't agree. Jason is right here.
> The lock can exist in libc, but until pthreads registers itself with libc
> the locking primitives are no-ops.
The lock primitive (test and set) can exist in libc, but the rest of
the locking (queues, priority, etc) really is too thread-system
specific to be in libc.
Now, what we _are_ doing (right now in fact, and before I started
this) is to have locks with function calls that map to do-nothing
functions until the pthread_mutex_lock() or the like is present.
I have a hard time believing that we can make a generic lock in libc,