I agree with you. So is it true, that I now _have to_ initialize everything with NIL explicitly, if I want them to be inited to a known value for all threads?
I was specifically avoiding this so far, because the NIL assignment would just take some extra time one startup (not much, but keeping startup time low is important, and this is just an extra cost for each STATIC variable around the app). Brgds, Viktor On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Mindaugas Kavaliauskas <dbto...@dbtopas.lt > wrote: > Hi, > > > Same for me. It seem more 'intuitive' for me that each thread really has >> it's own initial value, even when the value by itself is the same. >> > > I agree, and I prefer even more strict behaviour here. Thread statics > should be initialized to NIL on thread startup. Because it's static of THAT > PARTICULAR thread, and its' value is not related to value of parent thread > statics. This also makes to leave cloning decision for programmer: he can > clone, or do not clone, or create new objects, typed pointers, since cloning > for them usually means nothing. > > I see Przemek is already committed the change. We can leave it. The above > opinion is more "theoretical", because I have we very few MT programming > skills and I do not have a strong feeling on that should be default in cases > like this. > > > Regards, > Mindaugas > > _______________________________________________ > Harbour mailing list > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour >
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
