apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] new lock APIs, rwlocks, condition variables
Date Tue, 04 Sep 2001 13:35:10 GMT
On Monday 03 September 2001 23:42, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 11:35:52PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 10:11:18PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > > I'm chatting with Aaron to see what's up with this and if I can
> > > reproduce his results.  I'm scratching my head at this.
> >
> > (Just to keep the list in sync with what I've found...)
> >
> > In my tests, the performance is essentially identical (Aaron sent
> > me the httpd component of the patch).
> >
> > However, --without-threads is busted with this patch.  -- justin
>
> I will be fixing --without-threads tomorrow. Thanks for bringing this
> to my attention.
>
> What is typically done for functions like these in APR, Should I:
>
> a) put #if APR_HAS_THREADS around the apr_thread_mutex_*() function,
>    prototypes; essentially causing all code that wishes to use these
> functions to either fail at compile-time or have to put their own
> conditionals in?
>
> or
> b) have those functions that cannot function without APR_HAS_THREADS simply
>    return APR_ENOTIMPL?
>
> (i'm leaning for the (b) option, but that's just me)

Option a.  If we are going to break, we should break at compile time.

Ryan

______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom				rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message