Re: snap-2004-11-03 breakage

[Ross Johnson <rpj at ise dot canberra dot edu dot au>]

Robert Kindred wrote:

> On the other hand, having pthread_t to be a pointer forces me to put
> compiler switches in my code that runs on both Windows and QNX.  I would
> appreciate knowing the general direction things are taking.
>
>  
What specifics of pthread_t are causing you to have to treat 
it differently on different systems? Applications shouldn't 
have to know how pthread_t is actually defined.

Re the general direction for the library:
The library has reached a point where it's stable, except 
for some relatively quiet issues, such as thread ID reuse, 
left to fix. Defining pthread_t as a pointer meant that a 
new thread could acquire the same ID as a recently detached 
or joined thread, which could be disasterous. There were no 
serious bug fixes to the last snapshot and no significant
fundamentally new features added.

The changes to mutexes in this snapshot are also helping 
prepare the way for [possibly] making headway on 
POSIX_PROCESS_SHARED mutexes, semaphores etc. This may still 
prove difficult, but some more definite impedements
have now been removed.

This is the first time in over 6 years, if I recall 
correctly, that the library's ABI has changed, and there are 
no further changes planned.

Regards.
Ross

> Robert Kindred
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com
> [mailto:pthreads-win32-owner@sources.redhat.com]On Behalf Of Gisle Vanem
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 7:18 AM
> To: pthreads-win32
> Subject: snap-2004-11-03 breakage
>
>
> snap-2004-11-03 breaks a lot of applications by the way 'pthread_t' is
> defined:
>
> typedef struct {
>    void * p;                   /* Pointer to actual object */
>    unsigned int x;             /* Extra information - reuse count etc */
> } ptw32_handle_t;
>
> typedef ptw32_handle_t pthread_t;
>
> Code like (from Ettercap)
>  pthread_t pid = ec_thread_getpid("golem");
>  if (pid != 0)
>    ec_thread_destroy(pid);
>
> no longer works; you cannot compare a struct against 0.
>
> I'm not sure you really meant to do that or if the typedef should be
> typedef ptw32_handle_t *pthread_t;
>
> --gv
>
>
>