Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 47142 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2004 20:02:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Jul 2004 20:02:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 88329 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2004 20:02:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 88190 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2004 20:02:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 88139 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jul 2004 20:02:21 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [80.229.52.226] (HELO hugin.webthing.com) (80.229.52.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:02:16 -0700 Received: by hugin.webthing.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 30C2E41011; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:02:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hugin.webthing.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 286533FF40; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:02:14 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:02:14 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Kew To: dev@httpd.apache.org Cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: setjmp/longjmp vs try/throw/catch In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20040720013714.1743aec0@pop3.rowe-clan.net> Message-ID: References: <6.1.2.0.2.20040720013714.1743aec0@pop3.rowe-clan.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > IIRC - all setjmp and other usually-thread-agnostic calls in a normal clib > were redesigned to use TLS in the Win32 msvcrt lib, long before most > Unixes considered implementing threads :) I believe on win32 you will > be fine, I'd be more worried about the thread implementations. I have it on credible authority (in IRC from someone I believe, after I asked) that POSIX requires it to be thread-safe. That's good enough for me: tells me I don't need to advise the Client to use prefork. > This sure sounds like an abstraction we should assist with using apr. Agreed. But I don't have APR karma to introduce the idea there. -- Nick Kew