Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 11:43:19 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: cimaxp1!jb@werple.net.au (John Birrell) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jb@cimlogic.com.au Subject: Re: A quick vote on pthreads PLZ Message-ID: <199510231843.LAA11420@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199510212130.HAA06203@werple.net.au> from "John Birrell" at Oct 22, 95 07:05:34 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > would it do with all the places that return a pointer to static storage? > > These fall into three categories: > > (1) Functions which have a *_r() reentrant equivalent like readdir_r which > have extra arguments so that static storage is avoided. > (2) Functions which malloc memory and return that instead. The MIT code does > this in places. Return the static storage, as normal, unless create_thread() has been called, in which case, malloc the storage instead. > (3) Dunno what the solution is. No matter what it's supposed to be, what it *will* be is a static storage compatability hack. Static storage returns need to be deprecated. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199510231843.LAA11420>