On Sep 2, 4:14 pm, Chris Torek <nos...@torek.net> wrote: > In article <bf50c8e1-1476-41e1-b2bc-61e329bfa...@s12g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> > Adam Skutt <ask...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >No, it can only pass a void*, which isn't much better than passing an > >int. > > It is far better than passing an int, although it leaves you with > an annoying storage-management issue, and sidesteps any reasonable > attempts at type-checking (both of which are of course "par for > the course" in C).
And when written out, makes it sound distinctly worse than passing an int :p. And let's not kid ourselves, unless you're a C programmer, it is distinctly worse than passing an int. Heck, your example (snipped) goes out of your way to unnecessarily leverage the functionality provided by pthreads. > Some manual pages are clearer about this than others. Here is one > that I think is not bad: > > The symbolic constant PTHREAD_CANCELED expands to a constant > expression of type (void *), whose value matches no pointer to > an object in memory nor the value NULL. > > So, provided you use pthread_exit() "correctly" (always pass either > NULL or the address of some actual object in memory), the special > reserved value is different from all of "your" values. Unfortunately, I'm not sure all implementations behave that way. Not that cancellation is really worth bothering with anyway, but it's a pretty nasty corner case. Adam -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
