On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 09:05:07PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
John Darrington <[email protected]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 08:26:57PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> John Darrington <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Any objections if I check in some thread safety changes to the
lower
> > levels, such as the attached patch ?
> >
> > I don't think there's going to be a multi-threaded pspp for
production
> > use any time soon, but I've been doing some experiments in order
to
> > find out what some of the issues are.
>
> Could we put this into a separate branch? I'm nervous about
> adding unneeded dependencies.
>
> It doesn't need any additional dependencies, unless you count an extra
> gnulib module as a dependency.
Won't the gnulib module will cause our binaries to link against
new libraries, e.g. libpthread on Linux?
At any rate, this will change some very cheap operations, such as
incrementing a value, into relatively expensive ones.I thought they were supposed to do nothing if a thread library wasn't specified.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
