Hi All, I just subscribed to the pthreads-win32 mailing list since I am developing a pthread C++ class (in a very early stage). To be able to support pthreads-win32 I need that the declarations are following the posix standard. Usually this is does not make a big difference, but for my purpose it is important: pthreads-win32s declaration of PTW32_DLLPORT int PTW32_CDECL pthread_mutexattr_gettype (pthread_mutexattr_t * attr, int *kind); should be re-defined as: PTW32_DLLPORT int PTW32_CDECL pthread_mutexattr_gettype (const pthread_mutexattr_t * attr, int *kind); according to the posix standard: int pthread_mutexattr_gettype(const pthread_mutexattr_t *restrict attr, int *restrict type); I changed it successfully in my test copy of pthreads-win32. I could apply the change by myself to CVS if write access could be granted. All the best, and thanks for the good work, Hagen.
I've applied Stephan's change to the following routines in CVS
(currently untested):-
pthread_attr_getschedpolicy()
pthread_attr_getinheritsched()
pthread_mutexattr_gettype()
Thanks Stephan.
stephan o'farrill wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I just subscribed to the pthreads-win32 mailing list since I am
> developing a pthread C++ class (in a very early stage). To be able to
> support pthreads-win32 I need that the declarations are following the
> posix standard.
> Usually this is does not make a big difference, but for my purpose it
> is important:
> pthreads-win32s declaration of
>
> PTW32_DLLPORT int PTW32_CDECL pthread_mutexattr_gettype
> (pthread_mutexattr_t * attr, int *kind);
>
> should be re-defined as:
>
> PTW32_DLLPORT int PTW32_CDECL pthread_mutexattr_gettype (const
> pthread_mutexattr_t * attr, int *kind);
>
> according to the posix standard:
> int pthread_mutexattr_gettype(const pthread_mutexattr_t *restrict
> attr, int *restrict type);
>
> I changed it successfully in my test copy of pthreads-win32.
> I could apply the change by myself to CVS if write access could be granted.
>
> All the best,
> and thanks for the good work,
> Hagen.
>
Hi all, I wonder if it could be interesting to port the actual code of cond_var to use The vista con_var ? For performance issues, or for design ? I'm really not an expert but I'd like to know more about the good and bad aspect of this propose. Thanks Michel Pacilli