On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > --On Monday, August 9, 2004 8:57 PM +0400 malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Condition variables on Win32 are broken, if you are going to label > > APR with 1.0 mark and release it right now, without mentioning this > > fact in big red letters, this would essentially be equal to releasing > > a trojan horse - a free, attractive, portable thing with a stamp of > > greatness (Apache) in its name, but deadly. > > The number of Win32 developers who are knowledgeable about this area are > fairly small, so any patches you may have are certainly welcomed. However, I > will point out that it's probably been that way for years without anyone > caring enough to fix it. > > I don't know a thing about Win32, so I'm of no help. And, suspect that to be > the case for the majority of APR developers. I also doubt it's a problem in > the API - so fixes to the Win32 condition variables can be done in APR 1.0.1 > if someone steps up and fixes it. But, a 1.0 showstopper? I say no. But, > adding a warning to the 1.0 release notes sounds fine to me. -- justin >
API is fine. As Max Khon pointed out there are other problems in Win32 threading, so i belive (big)warning would be a way to go. Plus perhaps a mention of win32 pthreads which are immune to these. After all APR threading API is based on Pthreads so people can convert later. -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
