Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:35:31 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Please review - header cleanups Message-ID: <200104190634.f3J6Xvw99980@gratis.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104190843520.4850-100000@besplex.bde.org> ; from Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> "Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:37:18 %2B1000." References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104190843520.4850-100000@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Said Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>:
> Possible implementations:
> 1) Do the same things as are planned for `struct timespec': use a tiny
> header that declares just `struct mtx' and include this header as
> necessary.
Ok so this would be a header with only the "struct mtx { ... };" in it,
and it would be included in all the headers that need to know the size
and shape of struct mtx (including sys/mutex.h)?
> 2) Do the same things as are done for size_t: define a macro that declares
> `struct mtx' in a not so tiny secondary header; include this header and
> expand it as necessary. This is uglier than (1), but doesn't require
> so many headers.
I think I prefer 1).
> 3) Combination/variation of on (1)-(2): conditionally declare various
> structs and types in a not so tiny secondary header; include this
> header with only the required declarations selected. This method is
> used in glibc. This is not as ugly as (2), but I think it is slower
> than both (1) and (2).
ONE header to declare _all_/lots_of the "internal" structures? Hmmm...
M
--
Mark Murray
Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104190634.f3J6Xvw99980>