[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Can we go GTK-only?

From: Perry E. Metzger
Subject: Re: Can we go GTK-only?
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 15:15:49 -0400

On Tue, 01 Nov 2016 19:08:51 +0200 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden,
> > address@hidden From: Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>
> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 09:54:51 -0700
> >   
> > >>  > gmalloc is only thread-safe if Emacs is built with
> > >>  > pthreads.  
> > >>
> > >> Yes, and that's what one would expect. If you build Emacs in
> > >> single-threaded mode, malloc won't be thread-safe. But in the
> > >> normal case nowadays, malloc should be thread-safe.  
> > >
> > > pthreads is not the only way to have threads.  
> > 
> > On any modern system POSIX system it is. Counterexample, please.  
> You can find them yourself if you are interested.  I have more
> important things to do with my time.

You do realize that this means that most of the rest of us are not
going to take your claim seriously.

I cannot name

a) a POSIX system that uses a threading system other than pthreads
(which makes sense since the POSIX standard mandates pthreads)

b) any system that implements both C and threads where malloc is not
thread safe and has not always been thread safe since the threading
implementation was shipped (which makes sense because otherwise no
threaded software would be stable).

It is possible such systems existed long ago. They do not now.

If you claim you can find such things but that you do not choose to,
I think the rest of us are simply going to believe your claim as

As for non-POSIX systems Emacs runs on, the only significant one is
Windows, and in Windows, malloc is thread safe in threaded code, just
as one would expect.

Perry E. Metzger                address@hidden

reply via email to

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