On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:44:25PM -0600, William Rowe wrote: > Now how are you going to avoid calling apr_foo_mutex_create calling > apr_bar_mutex_create without 1. duplicating code, or 2. exposing the > synonyms to the client code [via apr/include/apr_foo_mutex.h"] ? > > Either we have an extra call setup/teardown in mutexing code [already time > sensitive] or we have APR_HAS_FOO_IS_BAR_MUTEX-style declarations > in apr.[h.in|.hw.|.nw] that feed our apr_foo_mutex.h header.
Yes, you're right, and I don't see any way around it. I am still hung up on the feeling that we are exposing an implementation detail. What I mean by "implementation detail" is this is not a macro that we want to encourage app authors to use, in the way they might want to use APR_HAS_THREADS, for example. They should never use an APR_PROC_MUTEX_IS_GLOBAL to change the way their code compiles. -aaron
