Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok. Though I do not see the point of the FASTSEM/FASTSYNCH rename.
>>>> FASTSEM is short, and we are not much interested in getting anything
>>>> else than semaphores faster.
>>> We aren't optimizing semaphores (at least not yet), we are optimizing
>>> mutexes only. And if we ever optimize also semaphores, FASTSYNCH will
>>> luckily still fit. :)
>> The name was chosen because we plan to optimize semaphores as well, and
>> because mutexes are simply a special kind of semaphores, so, by saying
>> FASTSEM, we cover semaphores as well as mutexes.
>
> That depends on how you define both - most semaphore definitions do not
> include the ownership concept, thus are not a superclass of
> (owner-tracking) mutexes we consider here.
>From my point of view, a mutex is a semaphore. If we imagine it in
simple OOP terms, the mutex class inherit from the semaphore class. Yes,
it has an owner member which the semaphore has not, but it still is a
semaphore.
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
