On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]> wrote: > Hez, > > Just a gut reaction, but it seems a reasonable goal/expectation would be that > the library should be thread-safe at the stream level, meaning that once a > stream is created (and probably while listed in what is a globally > mutex-protected list), independent threads can safely use separate streams. > Using thread-local storage rather than globals might go a long way to allow > that. Comments? > > Bill >
Bill,, I agree that this would be ideal. However, several pieces of PLplot's internals use global variables to manage state, preventing isolation of each individual stream. Most of these pieces stretch many years back in PLplot's history, so they will take some time to cleanly remove. That said, I agree that thread safety at the stream level is something we should work toward. Identification of portions of PLplot code which are per-stream thread safe and/or patches would be very helpful! If all of the portions of PLplot which prevent stream-level thread safety are identified then it will make it much simpler to update PLplot successfully. Further discussion on this should probably move to the PLplot development list. Thank you for your interest in pushing PLplot forward! Hez ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Plplot-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-general
