From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Dec 17 00:40:07 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 2AC4B106566B;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:40:07 +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 989B58FC12;
	Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:40:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.0.33] (99-195-103-194.dyn.centurytel.net [99.195.103.194])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pBH0VIhF018743
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:31:20 -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 <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:31:14 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <FCFDD684-8E39-458B-A6A0-A7FE4834B888@bsdimp.com>
References: <20111216214913.GA1771@hoeg.nl>
	<20111216220914.GW50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<20111216221959.GB1771@hoeg.nl>
	<20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
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]);
	Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:31:22 -0700 (MST)
Cc: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, arch@FreeBSD.org, threads@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 <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:40:07 -0000


On Dec 16, 2011, at 3:31 PM, Kostik Belousov wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:19:59PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote:
>> Hello Kostik,
>> 
>> * Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, 20111216 23:09:
>>> If application that does not use the new interface supposed to be
>>> able to implement function with new names, then the not-underscored
>>> symbols must be weak.
>> 
>> For example when an application wants to implement its own functions
>> that are named thrd_*(), for example?
> Yes. The realistic example is the code written to C99/SUSv4 conformance
> that happens to define thrd_<something>.
> 
> It might be that easiest solution is to put the functions into
> separate library, besides defining them weak.

I thought the canonical solution here was to say

#if POSIX_VISIBLE >= 201201
<prototypes here>
#endif

Except this isn't posix. :(

Warner