From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 4:13 PM
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 02:27:37PM -0600, William Rowe wrote: > > > > The more I consider the win32 fix, this netware and the coming BeOS fix, I > > believe we need > > two symbols; > > > > APR_GLOBAL_MUTEX_IS_THREAD_MUTEX > > > > and > > > > APR_GLOBAL_MUTEX_IS_PROC_MUTEX > > > > and pull off all the magic in apr_global.h. Unless threadproc [global] > > mutexes are custom, > > it seems Win32/OS2 can simply use defines to apr_proc_mutex > > (APR_GLOBAL_MUTEX_IS_PROC_MUTEX), > > while Netware and BeOS can simply use apr_thread_mutex > > (APR_GLOBAL_MUTEX_IS_THREAD_MUTEX). > > These are implementation details, so I don't see why they need to be > defined globally (in apr.h, if I'm understanding you correctly). I do > agree, however, that the extra function call is unnecessary. Can we use > APR_INLINE? An alternative would be to #define APR_PROC_MUTEX_IS_GLOBAL > in the include/arch/<foo>/proc_mutex.h and let that dictate how > global_mutex.c is implemented per platform (or in the default impl.). Name, please, one place where APR_INLINE actually inlines squat today.
