On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Vincent Torri <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 15 May 2011, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Vincent Torri <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> some questions: >>> >>> * is it normal that in eina_condition_free(), the mutex is not destroyed >>> ? >> >> Yes. It's only a link to the real mutex, not a copy. I am thinking >> about adding refcounting in debug mode to be sure that mutex still >> exist and is alive for all condition that use it (and of course giving >> a warning if it's not). > > ok > >>> * in eina_lock_take() >>> >>> #ifdef EINA_HAVE_ON_OFF_THREADS >>> if (!_eina_threads_activated) >>> { >>> #ifdef EINA_HAVE_DEBUG_THREADS >>> assert(pthread_equal(_eina_main_loop, pthread_self())); >>> #endif >>> return EINA_LOCK_SUCCEED; >>> } >>> #endif >>> >>> is it normal to return EINA_LOCK_SUCCEED here ? >> >> Yes, because it's not a failure. It doesn't say it took the lock, it >> is saying it didn't fail. > > so the code in the win32 part > > > static inline Eina_Lock_Result > eina_lock_take(Eina_Lock *mutex) > { > #ifdef EINA_HAVE_ON_OFF_THREADS > if (!_eina_threads_activated) return EINA_LOCK_FAIL; > #endif > > is wrong, right ? I ask because before the last change, EINA_FALSE was > returned
Yes, it's wrong. -- Cedric BAIL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know. Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
