harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] APR latest release is 1.2.7, we're using 1.2.6. Should we switch?
Date Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:11:02 GMT


Salikh Zakirov wrote:
> Weldon Washburn wrote:
>> After reading an excellent survey (
>> http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/win32-cv-1.html)on implementing
>> posix-style
>> condition variables on windowsxp,  its not clear that being dependent on
>> any
>> external posix-to-win32 wrapper is acceptable for Harmony.  If this
>> paper is
>> correct, it looks rather tricky to correctly implement condition variables
>> on windows.  My take on the whole subject is that Harmony needs to fix
>> and/or morph some "condition variable on win32" thingy.  Its OK if the
>> "thingy" happens to be APR.  But I would not let APR slow Harmony down.  To
>> do condition variables per the paper, the APR code base may change a bunch.
>> Its unclear if the APR crowd will want to incorporate such mods.  I lean
>> towards dumping APR.
> 
> ... or just stop pretending we are using apr_thread_cond_t, while in fact
> we are using completely different implementation.
> 
> I think that patched (rewritten) thread_cond.c can easily be ported
> to implement hycond_t directly (besides, currently hycond_t is #defined to be
> apr_thread_cond_t).
> 
> We do not need to get orthodox about "use APR" or "dump APR",
> but instead just use what we need, and do not use what is not suitable.

+1

If we've patched the standard impl of apr_thread_cond_t into oblivion, 
lets just be honest and use our own method.

(I'm more than happy if we wean ourselves off of the dogmatic use of 
APR, and just use what makes sense for *us*)

geir

Mime
View raw message