Hi, Corinna Vinschen, le Tue 06 Nov 2007 16:45:50 +0100, a écrit : > Heh, I just re-read the whole discussion at > http://www.mail-archive.com/cygwin%40cygwin.com/msg49835.html again, > and it's interesting how the point of view changes with another > testcase. Pity. Returning EBUSY really looked like a good idea.
Mmm, the "Non-Idempotent Data Key Creation" section only says that some behavior was rejected because there is other ways to achieve it. But to me it does not mean that EBUSY would be a good idea. What explicitely says that you shouldn't reuse a pthread_key_t? Samuel -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
