This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Thread-, Signal- and Cancellation-safety documentation


On 06/07/2013 09:00 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>> First of all, it's not clear that we're talking about current or future
>> standards.
> 
> If we have a deficiency in the current standard, that presumably needs
> to be fixed, then we can do that now in what we provide to users, with
> the hope of later applying it to a future version of the standard.  I
> don't see any problem here.

No. There is a big problem here.

The complexity of the topic is so high that a mistake on our part
could have us document something that is later incompatible with
Issue 8 of POSIX.

The consequence of an incompatibility with POSIX is so terrible
that what you argue is too risky a path to take.

Therefore I am strongly in favour of Alex's position which is to
use what language POSIX has, even if it not well defined, and to
improve the documentation.

This conversation should still happen. It should be about Issue 8,
and about what will go into the next version of the standard.
Understanding the problem from glibc's perspective is incredibly
important because it will help us align with POSIX and comment
intelligibly on Issue 8.

However, at that point it is no longer a discussion about Alex's
patch or his current work.

Cheers,
Carlos.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]