On 09/05/2010 09:37 PM, Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm about to finalize new libdbi and libdbi-drivers releases now that
> all issues with the new libdbi-drivers test kit seem to be fixed. As a
> result of recent discussions about using libdbi in multithreaded
> applications, I've decided to rename the functions of our new
> instance-based interface. I've realized that our original choice of
> xyz_r superseding the old xyz functions was ill-advised as the _r
> suffix is commonly used for reentrant implementations of non-reentrant
> functions. I'd like to avoid any confusion in this matter, therefore
> I've renamed these functions to xyz_i. The _i reminds the user that
> this version of the function requires an instance handle. The
> following functions are affected by this change:
> 

That's basically how the _r suffix works. Take a look at rand() and
rand_r(). If the function does something requiring state the thread
safe version of it will require that state to be passed as a variable,
exactly like the instance pointer used for libdbi.

The _i suffix would easily be mistaken for a function returning a
signed integer, using a mix of multiple-word and reverse hungarian
notation. 

I recommend against it.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.erics...@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
libdbi-devel mailing list
libdbi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libdbi-devel

Reply via email to