On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 09:05:40AM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 01:54:14AM +0200, Luke Kenneth Casson > > Leighton wrote: > > > ah, yes, but it _is_ supported by DCEthreads - see > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/freedce which provides, > > > horror-of-horrors, thread cancellation *emulated* on > > > top of POSIX threads. > > [snip, snip] > > > ... but what i am basically saying is, on NT and Unix, > > > thread cancellation _is_ possible, it's just that i > > > think you might not be too happy about the coding-route > > > you might have to take to _do_ it :) :) > > > > Possible, but not robust. > > DCE/RPC is _very_ robust. That being the case its underlying > mechanisms are very likely to be robust too. > > > And, it would add 3.5 million lines of code to APR. > > Nah. It would add the lines to add thread cancellation. The > 3.5 million LOC is the _entire_ dce rpc codebase. Only part > of that is the dce threads library. And, I believe there are > some old dce/rpc team members in our midst who could know how > this all fit together. I could be wrong though.
[warning: tangent -- i changed the subject appropriately] I must admit that it sounds tantalizing, but I have a comment and a question: - It appears that the Free DCE package quoted above is under the GPL and is therefore incompatible with the Apache License. - What is meant by "*emulated* on top of POSIX threads"? What are the tradeoffs, if any, compared to a implementation that is native to the OS? -aaron