On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 10:28 -0400, Geo Carncross wrote:
All of which makes exposing the synchronization primitives used by OW
pretty much worthless.
I should clarify, that providing a common API to the language bindings
isn't bad, but requiring that they use them is- that is, having other
parts
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 10:37 am, Geo Carncross wrote:
I should clarify, that providing a common API to the language bindings
isn't bad, but requiring that they use them is- that is, having other
parts of OW use the same mutexes and locks and whathaveyou that the OW
language bindings do.
