Hi, On Mon, 2002-01-07 at 00:18, Havoc Pennington wrote: > > Alex Graveley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Why are non-static recursive and read-write locks missing from Glib2?! > > > > I always wondered why we have static vs. dynamic, since you can > use any static mutex dynamically as well. > > mutex = g_new (GStaticRecMutex, 1); > g_static_mutex_init (mutex); > > So it would have made more sense to me to just call it GRecMutex and > had g_rec_mutex_new() as a convenience function that did the above.
Yes, right. In hindsight it was wrong to not make GMutex, what GRecMutex is now. The reason was to be more consistent with the rest of GLib (have a _new function returning a reference to the allocated and created object and not an _init function initialzing an already allocated object) and because libnspr did it the same way. But since the current setup with both GMutex and GRecMutex is already released with GLib 1.2, there is no chance fixing it. The GRecStaticMutex was named so simply because of consistency with GStaticMutex. I do not think, a GRecMutex will be added. As Havoc pointed out, this is not necessary. Bye, Sebastian -- Sebastian Wilhelmi mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://goethe.ira.uka.de/~wilhelmi _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
