Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 21:02:17 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support Message-ID: <85477.1324155737@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:31:26 %2B0200." <20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>, Kostik Belousov writes: >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf >BTW, it looks not very useful to add a bunch of threading functions >without at least trying to specify the memory model. I have never fully understood what goal these sequential obesity-binges from ISO-C serve. Structure packing ? Nahh, nobody uses that. Big/Little Endian API ? Naah, nobody moves binary data between computers. Ohhh, but I know: Lets make a rival to the POSIX threads, we can do it much better and slightly incompatible, big market there I'm sure. What ? A "assert mutex is held" facility ? Why would you want that ? Just write perfect code to begin with! Bang! Bang! Bang! &c &c... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?85477.1324155737>