Re: 1.4 release schedule [Was Re: Allowing user data in lt_dlhandles (revisited)]

[Gary V. Vaughan]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 12:54:10AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jan  5, 2001, "Gary V. Vaughan" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > I have never done multi-threaded programming in anger
> 
> The pointers to lock functions would initially be NULL

Okay.  I'll buy it.

Do we ask the user to supply wrapper functions to our pointers,
or should I be setting up prototypes with particular footprints?

How about:

    void (*lt_dlmutex_lock)    LT_PARAMS((void)) = 0;
    void (*lt_dlmuxtex_unlock) LT_PARAMS((void)) = 0;

Is that sufficient?

> I mean to always call rpl_[[snip]]realloc internally, so that it only
> forwards to lt_dlrealloc the requests that are portable.  In case
> lt_dlrealloc is NULL, we fallback to lt_dlmalloc, rpl_memcpy,
> lt_dlfree, unless lt_dlmalloc and lt_dlfree are malloc and free,
> respectively, in which case we'd use the system's realloc, but, again,
> only for the portable kinds of requests.

I get it now.  Will do.

Cheers,
        Gary.
-- 
  ___              _   ___   __              _         mailto: address@hidden
 / __|__ _ _ ___ _| | / / | / /_ _ _  _ __ _| |_  __ _ ___       address@hidden 
| (_ / _` | '_|// / |/ /| |/ / _` | || / _` | ' \/ _` | _ \
 \___\__,_|_|\_, /|___(_)___/\__,_|\_,_\__, |_||_\__,_|//_/
home page:  /___/                      /___/                  gpg public key:
http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk           http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk/key.asc