On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 11:22, Ernest W. Lessenger wrote:
> At 09:14 AM 2/23/2004, you wrote:
> >Why would you program something that isn't thread safe? From what I can
> >tell, it isn't much extra effort to do things the right way instead of
> >debuging crap later.
>
> I wouldn't, and generally don
At 09:14 AM 2/23/2004, you wrote:
Why would you program something that isn't thread safe? From what I can
tell, it isn't much extra effort to do things the right way instead of
debuging crap later.
I wouldn't, and generally don't. But sometimes (rarely) you need to include
functions that aren't th
On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 10:55, Ernest W. Lessenger wrote:
> At 08:31 AM 2/23/2004, you wrote:
> >On Monday 23 February 2004 10:15, Ernest W. Lessenger wrote:
> > > I'm writing an application for asterisk (really just a set of
> > > access commands to the builtin API), and I notice that a lot of
> > >
At 08:31 AM 2/23/2004, you wrote:
On Monday 23 February 2004 10:15, Ernest W. Lessenger wrote:
> I'm writing an application for asterisk (really just a set of
> access commands to the builtin API), and I notice that a lot of
> existing applications are not thread-safe. Should they be? Should
> mine
On Monday 23 February 2004 10:15, Ernest W. Lessenger wrote:
> I'm writing an application for asterisk (really just a set of
> access commands to the builtin API), and I notice that a lot of
> existing applications are not thread-safe. Should they be? Should
> mine be?
Could you elaborate, please?
I'm writing an application for asterisk (really just a set of access
commands to the builtin API), and I notice that a lot of existing
applications are not thread-safe. Should they be? Should mine be?
Thanks,
--Ernest
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[E
