Hi Stephan, > Re the check in the dor: The osl_destroyThread documentation says "If > Thread is NULL, the function won't do anything." Why not rely on this?
Because sometimes a thread object might be created, but never actually used? > Re the other checks: Is it useful to have those functions silently noop > for a non-created thread? I would guess that any code that relies on > those newly introduced checks is already in error, and should rather be > exposed and fixed rather than hidden. (Also, getIdentifier for > m_hTread==NULL confusingly returns the id of the current thread, at > least in the osl/unx branch.) I would agree for everything but the dtor. Finally, if someone calls Thread::resume (or something like this) before |create|, then this is clearly a bug. But if you call the dtor before calling create (vulgo: You decide to not use the thread at all), this *might* be valid. At least this would be my careful argueing, as the one who ages ago introduced the code which actually destroys Threads without using them ... Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
