[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 14:07:23 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Proposed new cancellation type
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 09:35:07AM +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Rich,
> I think it would be a good idea to think along these lines from a
> different aspect, namely C11 / C++11 threads. For the moment they
> don't include cancellation. Your ideas might be a good fit there,
> too. Something simple that would easily integrate into the error
> handling facilities of both languages.
>
> In any case, since threads now are considered part of the programming
> languages, any proposal in that direction should have their evolution
> in mind, too.
While I agree with your sentiment and would like to get something like
this in the language standards, I also think that's a much harder goal
to achieve. Their committees operate on much longer time frames and
are much stricter about what makes it in. My feeling is to focus on
POSIX first, but keep in mind ways the same ideas could be applied to
the language standards. In particular, applying this to C11 without
attaching the whole pthread cancellation cleanup framework would
probably require C11 threads to start with this new cancellation type,
rather than normal deferred cancellation, when implemented on top of
POSIX threads.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
