At 06:11 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, James Mastros wrote:
>On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > *) Embedding
> > *) Threads
> > *) Various platform "quirks". (And no I'm not even talking about VMS or
> > Windows...)
>Acatualy, win32 seems fairly close to POSIX norms with the environment.
>(Except that the names are case-insensitive (forced-uppercase,
>utf16-wise), though values are utf16 arbitrary data (OS-ignored, except
>for os-defined variables.)
Which is fine--I was thinking of the platforms where you have to be careful
who allocates memory for setenv and how, or things core. Wheee....
>Also, I don't see how embeding and threading effect the environment. The
>OS should take care of locking if you use right primitivies. For embedded
>interpreters, I should think they should get their own %ENV.
Who has control over the environment? The primary thread? All the threads?
Should some have access and others not? Is there read-only access, or
access to some but not all of the variables? Can an interpreter create or
delete entries, and if so which ones? How much control does an embedder
have, anyway? Should we call a separate function when
getting/setting/querying/deleting? Do we even know which variables exist,
or do we have to ask? Is it even thread-safe?
It's kinda messy, and since we can put it off for a bit, I'd as soon do
that. We may have a half-kludge solution, but since that's all we have at
the moment I'd rather wait and maybe a stroke of genius will occur. Or
maybe not, in which case we're not really worse off than we are now.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
