> 0) complexifies comparison of thread IDs without obvious benefits, and
The reverse argument is also true: using IDs would complexify everything else
with the only benefit of simplifying the equal primitive.
> 1) does not work reliably because handles can be duplicated, and
That's pure FUD.
在 2019/7/29 22:43, JonY 写道:
>
> Any updates?
>
No. I am still under the impression that using thread handles as
`std::thread::id`s:
0) complexifies comparison of thread IDs without obvious benefits, and
1) does not work reliably because handles can be duplicated, and
2) makes
On 7/3/19 12:55 PM, Liu Hao wrote:
> 在 2019/7/2 下午8:27, Jonathan Wakely 写道:
>>
>> What do you mean by "unclosed thread"? If I read it correctly, the MSDN
>> page
>> refers to closing a handle (which makes sense), not closing a thread.
>>
>
> Yes, it meant a thread which has terminated but not
在 2019/7/2 下午8:27, Jonathan Wakely 写道:
>
> What do you mean by "unclosed thread"? If I read it correctly, the MSDN
> page
> refers to closing a handle (which makes sense), not closing a thread.
>
Yes, it meant a thread which has terminated but not deleted due to some
handles left open.
>>
On 02/07/19 20:14 +0800, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2019/7/2 下午8:00, Jonathan Wakely 写道:
The C++ standard says:
"The library may reuse the value of a thread::id of a terminated
thread that can no longer be joined."
So that's not a reason to use a handle.
According to MSDN [1] a thread ID is valid
在 2019/7/2 下午8:00, Jonathan Wakely 写道:
> The C++ standard says:
>
> "The library may reuse the value of a thread::id of a terminated
> thread that can no longer be joined."
>
> So that's not a reason to use a handle.
According to MSDN [1] a thread ID is valid 'until the thread has been
On 02/07/19 12:15 +0200, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 02/07/2019 12:12, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 02/07/2019 11:57, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2019/7/2 下午5:19, Eric Botcazou 写道:
It seems inappropriate to use handles as thread identifiers
(as handles
imply resource ownership and are not unique identifiers);
On 02/07/2019 12:12, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 02/07/2019 11:57, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2019/7/2 下午5:19, Eric Botcazou 写道:
It seems inappropriate to use handles as thread identifiers (as
handles
imply resource ownership and are not unique identifiers); thread
IDs (as
`DWORD` or `unsigned long`)
On 02/07/2019 11:57, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2019/7/2 下午5:19, Eric Botcazou 写道:
It seems inappropriate to use handles as thread identifiers (as handles
imply resource ownership and are not unique identifiers); thread IDs (as
`DWORD` or `unsigned long`) would be a better alternative.
This was
在 2019/7/2 下午5:19, Eric Botcazou 写道:
>> It seems inappropriate to use handles as thread identifiers (as handles
>> imply resource ownership and are not unique identifiers); thread IDs (as
>> `DWORD` or `unsigned long`) would be a better alternative.
>
> This was considered but ultimately
> It seems inappropriate to use handles as thread identifiers (as handles
> imply resource ownership and are not unique identifiers); thread IDs (as
> `DWORD` or `unsigned long`) would be a better alternative.
This was considered but ultimately rejected, as you can do nothing with a
thread Id,
在 2019/6/29 上午12:10, Jacek Caban 写道:
>
> You don't really need to store the whole __gthr_win32_thr_desc in TLS.
> If you stored just the handle, this wouldn't need a destructor.
>
>
The handle to be stored in the TLS ('the Handle' for short hereinafter)
should be a real handle, so there are a
Hi Eric,
On 6/28/19 3:42 PM, NightStrike wrote:
FYI, Eric posted this today to the GCC patches list. This may be of
great interest to many who would prefer native threads instead of the
winpthreads posix style interface.
Great work, Eric! I look forward to trying this out!
--
13 matches
Mail list logo
