[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the state of the concurrency branch

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: the state of the concurrency branch
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 22:08:41 +0300

> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:52:58 -0700
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> CC: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, address@hidden, 
>  address@hidden, address@hidden
> On 08/27/13 11:46, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > What is your plan for the no-threads case?
> Use the gnulib pthreads module.  It arranges for
> "#include <pthreads.h" to work on all platforms, with
> a no-op implementation for platforms that don't support
> pthreads.  It's similar to what is in systhread.h now,
> except it doesn't impose an extra naming layer.

I'd like to be at liberty to implement the few threads calls needed
for Emacs in a way that doesn't use pthreads ported to Windows.  Pth
doesn't seem to support Windows (and the latest release was in 2006,
not an encouraging sign).

Gnulib pthreads is OK for a no-op implementation, but that's not what
I have in mind.

Please make the changes to the current code keeping in mind a separate
non-pthread implementation for MS-Windows.  (I'm okay with adding a
separate file, say w32thread.c, which would emulate pthread calls, if
that's the model we want to follow exclusively.  Alternatively, we
could have a separate HAVE_PTHREADS and HAVE_W32THREADS branches of
the same few low-level functions.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]