proc_thread doesn't tell me anything. If I google for proc_thread, I get no hits. If I
google pthread, I at least get hits that I can search through to find anything to do
with
a 'lock'. pthread is easier to read than proc_thread. Yea, not great arguments for
using
pthread, but at least as strong as arguments to use proc_thread.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Bloom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Standardize AcceptMutex config
> On Wednesday 19 September 2001 08:56 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 07:53:47PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > Why is calling it proc_pthread silly? We are talking about a pthread
> > > > based process lock. Personally, I think Apache 1.3 should be changed,
> > > > especially since it hasn't been released yet. My concern is that
> > > > calling it a pthread lock makes it sound like we are just locking
> > > > threads.
> > >
> > > Fine, change one or the other. Having it inconsistent is *silly*.
> > > Personally, I think Apache 1.3's pthread makes more sense given the
> > > context. -- justin
> >
> > I agree with Justin.
>
> That's fine, could you please explain why? I am trying to understand this
> POV. Why don't you think that calling out the proc part is important?
> I don't mind being wrong, but I do mind not knowing why I am wrong. :-)
>
> Ryan
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
