httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: random questions...
Date Tue, 06 Aug 1996 16:12:02 GMT
Robert S. Thau wrote:
>   Not as I understand it. It would be a) difficult and b) pointless to maintain
>   non-threaded versions of stuff that uses threading. I think that at the very
>   least rsthreads (or equivalent) will be required. Since rsthreads is
>   exceedingly portable I can't see that this is a problem.
> I'm not sure I agree... look at the LDAP reference software.  The code
> is written in a "thread-aware" style.  On machines without thread
> support, it's still supported, by means of a file which provides
> trivial implementations (single-thread case only) of the functions
> used by the code.  Such "null threading" doesn't eliminate the
> dependancies completely, but it makes it perfectly manageable to build
> non-threaded and threaded versions of their server from the same code
> base without drowning in #ifdefs.

Ermmm ... but surely this rather defeats the object of using threading in the
first place? If we were prepared to write unthreaded versions of everything
why would we need threads? Or do you mean that the single-threaded version
would actually do less?



> rst

Ben Laurie                  Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435
Freelance Consultant and    Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472
Technical Director          Email:
A.L. Digital Ltd,           URL:
London, England.            Apache Group member (

View raw message