Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

Lee Kindness writes:> Tom Lane writes:>  > Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:>  > > On the other hand, things like,
getpwnam,strtok, etc have non-thread-safe>  > > APIs. They can never be made thread-safe. The *_r versions of these
functions> > > are standardized and required. If they don't exist then the platform simply>  > > does not support
threads.> > >  > This statement is simply false.  A platform can build thread-safe>  > versions of those "unsafe" APIs
ifit makes the return values point>  > to thread-local storage.  Some BSDs do it that way.  Accordingly, any>  >
simplistic"we must have _r to be thread-safe" approach is>  > incorrect.> > No, it's not. Using the _r functions on
suchsystems is BETTER because> the API is clean and the function can be implmented in a reentrant and> thread-safe
fashionwuithout the need for thread local storage or> mutex locking.
 

Sorry Tom, I should have read a bit more carefully! Yeah, I agree with
your point that the lack of _r functions doesn't mean the platform is
non thread-safe!

L.