J.Pietschmann wrote: > Well, static data often interferes badly with multithreading. > We can use it in the CLI, but in the core which is intended to be > possibly embedded in multithreaded long running server environments > should it is best to avoid them. Even if you can arrange to > synchronize properly (not as easy as many people think), blocked > threads on shared ressources will almost certainly generate angry > comments.
The only static data would be a pointer to the singleton object, which contains the real data. However, it seems that your point would still be valid with regard to that data. The choices for data to be shared amongst threads are: 1. Allow concurrent access. 2. Allow synchronized access. 3. Allow no access (can't share data between threads). We all agree that #1 is bad. Implementing #3 because #2 might be slow seems counterproductive. If a person in line at the store complains that the line is moving slowly, I don't see how it helps them to say that they can't shop here any more (but it will shut them up). Or am I missing some fourth option here? Victor Mote --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
