Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <024201c16db4$ef5f36e0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Lassi A. Tuura" <lassi DOT tuura AT cern DOT ch>,
   "Evan Pollan" <evan_pollan AT yahoo DOT com>
Cc: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <20011114212317 DOT 56701 DOT qmail AT web21002 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> <3BF384BA DOT B2DD3ECB AT cern DOT ch>
Subject: Re: pthread_create -- no callback?
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:07:21 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Nov 2001 09:05:31.0799 (UTC) FILETIME=[ADA66A70:01C16DB4]


===
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lassi A. Tuura" <lassi DOT tuura AT cern DOT ch>
To: "Evan Pollan" <evan_pollan AT yahoo DOT com>
Cc: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>;
<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: pthread_create -- no callback?


> > That's all I needed.  My experience is very stale w/ C & C++, but
why didn't I
> > get at least a compilation warning when I passed the reference to
the thread,
> > rather than its value?
>
> Because pthread_t == void *.  I am sure cygwin team would accept
> a patch that consistently uses for example an opaque type[*].  I
> suppose it might be a lot of simple-minded editing, but it would
> help catch a lot of trivial errors.

Yes, in fact void * was intended to serve the same purpose (as opposed
to a fully defined struct which the prior implementation had.

> [*] Like this: `struct __pthread; typedef __pthread *pthread_t;'.

Thank you. I've put this in my mail archive and will do a patch at some
point - if noone beats me to it that is :].

> This is all the client side knows about `__pthread', hence it is
> opaque.  The struct is defined in the implementation only.  Works
> of course only if the implementation really uses structs.  From a
> superficial inspection there's a 'pthread' class on cygwin side so
> it would work, but I couldn't quite figure out where the code made
> the transition from pthread_t == void * to pthread_t == pthread *.

Inside cygwin,
pthread_t == class pthread **

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/