From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 21 17:36:44 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B95C106566C; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:36:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564EB8FC18; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:36:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.30.101.53] ([209.117.142.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pBLHXN7D079556 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:33:25 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <4EF084A8.32369.B604AD16@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:33:16 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: >, <3065.1324375763@critter.freebsd.dk> <4EF084A8.32369.B604AD16@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com> To: "Niall Douglas" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (harmony.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.6]); Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:33:26 -0700 (MST) Cc: threads@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:36:44 -0000 On Dec 20, 2011, at 5:50 AM, Niall Douglas wrote: > The job was NOT done half-arsed. If you had any experience of sitting=20= > on these committees you would know how much dedication and effort is=20= > put into standards, especially JTC1 SC22 subcommittees. Every single=20= > API in there has been studied and pored over at length across=20 > multiple years. >=20 > Everything is the way it is for a good reason. If it doesn't make=20 > sense to you that's most likely because you're not half as=20 > experienced or clever as you think you are. If you really want to=20 > know why something is the way it is, all discussion regarding all=20 > points is documented in full. Incredible claims require incredible proof. The APIs speak for = themselves: they are half-assed (and the wrong half in some cases). To = assert that they are somehow clever and we're stupid requires that one = walk through the cleverness. The participants in this thread likely = have a combined century of implementation experience with threads. Perhaps you can point us to the archives where all this discussion is = available? Warner