apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@xbc.nu>
Subject Re: svn commit: r434327 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES include/arch/win32/apr_arch_threadproc.h misc/win32/start.c threadproc/win32/threadpriv.c
Date Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:00:22 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Mladen Turk wrote:
>   
>> Do not understand why are you against such a solution.
>> The half-way is IMHO always better then no-way :)
>>     
>
> Half-assed means that users rely on the design paradigm, only to discover
> later that it isn't portable.
>
> Part of the flaw was that this should have been noticed by the person who
> implemented the API on the Win32 platform with an obervation that it wasn't
> portable.
>
> Then one of three things happen, we choose not to implement it, we choose
> to implement with a #define that warns the user the pattern isn't portable
> or available in the current compilation, or we return ENOTIMPL to warn them
> at run time it's not available.
>
> You aren't solving the problem of helping users write portable code, which
> is the reason for my ongoing objection.
>   

FYI, I'm waiting for someone to send me the code that I'd made work on 
Win64. In restrospect, it's quite possible that I only fixed it for the 
static-link case -- DLLs do have their own ctor/dtor segments, but I'm 
not sure that they're noticed at program shutdown or library close.


I'll know more in a few days.


Mime
View raw message