From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] interface additions for the C thread implementation
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 11:16:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140907151610.GD23797@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410101101.4856.158.camel@eris.loria.fr>
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 04:45:01PM +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 07.09.2014, 07:32 -0400 schrieb Rich Felker:
> > On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 01:16:43PM +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, den 07.09.2014, 14:05 +0400 schrieb Alexander Monakov:
> > > > On Sun, 7 Sep 2014, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> > > > > > > For the C++ API/ABI, these also are different types, now, with type names
> > > > > > > (that are used for name mangling, e.g) as listed above.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Somebody better versed in C++ could perhaps contribute code that
> > > > > > > overloads the comparison and assignment operators such that a compilation
> > > > > > > that tries to compare or copy these types fails.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not sure what you meant by this last paragraph.
> > > > >
> > > > > AFAIR in C++ there are ways to inhibit usage of copy assignment by
> > > > > declaring some "operator=" function that is never defined. But my C++
> > > > > has really become rusty.
> > > >
> > > > There's no need to do that since those are unrelated structs, and therefore no
> > > > operator== and operator= are available in the first place. You also can't do
> > > > that in C (but in C++ you get an error rather than a warning when trying
> > > > to assign pointers).
> > >
> > > This is not about assignment between different types and also not for
> > > pointers but for the struct themselves.
> > >
> > > With the current C threads version the following is a priori allowed,
> > > but shouldn't:
> > >
> > > mtx_t a, b;
> > > mtx_init(&a, mtx_plain);
> > > b = a;
> > >
> > > This "works" in C and in C++.
> > >
> > > The corresponding code in pthreads would be UB.
> >
> > I'm not clear on whether the assignment is well-defined in pthreads,
> > but actually attempting to use the mutex (by passing it to any of the
> > pthread_mutex_* functions) would be UB. The same should be true for
> > C11 threads; if not, it's a defect.
>
> It is.
It is a defect? Or..?
> sure, we all (should) know that, but the average user wouldn't
>
> > I don't think the committee intended to forbid any of the above types
> > of implementation; on the contrary it seems they went out of their way
> > to support crazy types of implementations, e.g. by omitting
> > initializers.
>
> No, unfortunately for the later, the lack of a definition for default
> initialization and initializers seems to be intentional. There are
> people on the committee who defend the interdiction of statically
> initialized mutexes, seemingly because some oldish windows thread
> implementation didn't have it.
That's what I mean. By refusing to support static initialization of
mutexes, they seem to be supporting the possibility of implementations
for which static initialization is impractical, much like some of the
crazy ideas I mentioned above.
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-07 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-31 22:45 [PATCH 0/9] C thread patch series, v. 8.6 and 9.7 Jens Gustedt
2014-08-31 22:45 ` [PATCH 1/9] interface additions for the C thread implementation Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 0:21 ` Rich Felker
2014-09-07 9:13 ` Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 10:05 ` Alexander Monakov
2014-09-07 11:16 ` Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 11:31 ` Alexander Monakov
2014-09-07 11:32 ` Rich Felker
2014-09-07 14:45 ` Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 15:16 ` Rich Felker [this message]
2014-09-07 16:51 ` Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 16:55 ` Rich Felker
2014-09-07 1:19 ` Rich Felker
2014-08-31 22:46 ` [PATCH 2/9] additions to src/time and some implied minor changes here and there Jens Gustedt
2014-09-06 17:44 ` Rich Felker
2014-08-31 22:46 ` [PATCH 3/9] use weak symbols for the POSIX functions that will be used by C threads Jens Gustedt
2014-09-06 18:52 ` Rich Felker
2014-08-31 22:46 ` [PATCH 4/9] add the functions for tss_t and once_flag Jens Gustedt
2014-08-31 22:46 ` [PATCH 5/9] add the functions for mtx_t Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 1:51 ` Rich Felker
2014-09-07 1:54 ` Rich Felker
2014-08-31 22:47 ` [PATCH 6/9] add the functions for cnd_t Jens Gustedt
2014-08-31 22:47 ` [PATCH 7/9] add the thrd_xxxxxx functions Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 14:24 ` Rich Felker
2014-09-07 14:52 ` Jens Gustedt
2014-09-07 15:17 ` Rich Felker
2014-08-31 22:47 ` [PATCH 8/9] separate pthread_create and pthread_exit in two different TU Jens Gustedt
2014-08-31 22:48 ` [PATCH 9/9] Separate pthread_create and thrd_create Jens Gustedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140907151610.GD23797@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
--to=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).