Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>
> "Griffiths, Jonathon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > -MS docs state that crtdll is not very threadsafe, however I cant see any
> > reason why wines shouldnt be. I don't think any apps depend on non
> > threadsafe behaviour since by definition it is unpredictable. So I think it
> > may be worthwhile to make it MT safe. This would mean a large part of the
> > code could be shared with msvcrt.dll (way in the future). Also, under unix I
> > would expect more processes to be running so potentially it is more
> > important to be safe. Does this make sense?
>
> I think there's no point in making functions thread-safe if they are
> not thread-safe in Microsoft implementation. Any app that uses these
> functions will have to provide its own locking anyway, so we'd only be
> duplicating it and slowing things down.
Again, what about WineLib apps? Remember, that these apps on Windows would have
been linked to thread safe functions in msvcrt, but under WineLib will be linked
to libcrt.dll. Or are we going to have a seperate libmsvcrt.dll?
-Gav
--
Gavriel State
CEO
TransGaming Technologies Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
