apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@covalent.net
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr STATUS
Date Sun, 28 Jan 2001 17:40:29 GMT
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, David Reid wrote:

> Are we not using it as we haven't come across the case where we need it yet?
> If that's the case then I'll remove my +1 but from the note it looked as if
> we just weren't ever using it.

We aren't using the type parameter because nobody has had the time to
implement the read/write locks.  There should be a note about this
someplace, but it may not be there anymore.  We definately need a way to
specify a read/write lock, but it is very low on the priority list, at
least it is for me.

Ryan

> 
> david
> 
> >   @@ -62,7 +62,13 @@
> >          - It ignores the "type" parameter, so toss it.
> >          - The fname param is allowed to be NULL on the Unix platform.
> >            Change it to always use the passed value, and check callers.
> >   +        rbb says:   The type parameter is supposed to be used to
> determine
> >   +                    if we are working with a read/write lock or a
> mutex.
> >   +                    The fname parameter is essentially required if you
> >   +                    want to be portable, but I dislike wasting cycles
> to
> >   +                    outsmart the programmer.
> >            Status: david +1
> >   +                rbb -1
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message