On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 12:55:51PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > From: "Aaron Bannert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:24 PM > > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 11:53:39AM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > > From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:55 AM > > > > > > I spoke with rbb who is traveling, and finally persuaded him that exactly > > > two > > > thread arguments are reasonable, one is the single "apr's private and > > > otherwise > > > useful data", a private apr_thread_info_t, which the user can get from > > > accessor > > > calls > > > > (having a little trouble parsing this. for clarity, what will be the > > prototype of the worker_fn() -- (aka apr_thread_start_t)?) > > typedef void *(APR_THREAD_FUNC *apr_thread_start_t)(apr_thread_info_t > *apr_info, void *usr_info);
Quick implementation question. I've got this working as described above under UNIX, but I'd like to do this correctly and I've run into a small issue. I'm not seeing a reason for having apr_thread_info_t in the first place, and I think we should just override apr_thread_t with the data we need. It's already private, and OS2 is already doing it this way. Are there any reasons I wouldn't just do it the same way? We would end up with something like this: typedef void *(APR_THREAD_FUNC *apr_thread_start_t)(apr_thread_t *apr_info, void *usr_info); (either I'm missing something, or I don't know why I didn't offer this up before as a compromise.) -aaron
