X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 00:46:30 +0200 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Message-ID: <01c4f053$Blat.v2.2.2$e18729e0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 2.2.2 In-reply-to: (message from Brian Inglis on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 09:27:08 -0700) Subject: Re: More complaints from tests/libclink/check References: <200501010119 DOT j011JVxi015678 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT ltu DOT se> <01c4efef$Blat.v2.2.2$353e15e0 AT zahav DOT net DOT il> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 09:27:08 -0700 > From: Brian Inglis > > Allocation of any other buffer/struct storage required as auto/dynamic > should be sufficient to meet the reentrancy requirement. I don't see how allocation off the heap would solve reentrancy problems. Static storage is used there as simple solutions to specific problems; replacing that with malloc'ed or automatic storage could easily break the functionality. Let's see your suggested implementations, and talk then specifically. > I don't think we need to worry explicitly about threads within these > functions. ??? Then why do we need to have reentrant functions? We could simply provide a wrapper around the old code with the signature required by Posix.