Thanks, I went with that.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 01:09:47PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> I like NAME_get_unsafe() personally.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ethan
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:56:09PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> >> I don't really lik
I like NAME_get_unsafe() personally.
Thanks,
Ethan
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:56:09PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
>> I don't really like the names of the functions "NAME_get" and
>> "NAME_get__" could we come up with something that's a bit mo
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:56:09PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> I don't really like the names of the functions "NAME_get" and
> "NAME_get__" could we come up with something that's a bit more
> specific about the difference between them? Maybe get_init and get?
> I'm not sure what would be best .
I don't really like the names of the functions "NAME_get" and
"NAME_get__" could we come up with something that's a bit more
specific about the difference between them? Maybe get_init and get?
I'm not sure what would be best . . .
Acked-by: Ethan Jackson
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Ben P
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:40:32AM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 20 June 2013 20:10, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > Can you confirm that the autoconf test needs #include but
> > the actual program doesn't? It looks funny.
>
> Yes. It looks like it should be added in the actual program; right
> wow we end
On 20 June 2013 20:10, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Can you confirm that the autoconf test needs #include but
> the actual program doesn't? It looks funny.
Yes. It looks like it should be added in the actual program; right
wow we end up with the definition leaking from another header.
__
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 07:49:18PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 20 June 2013 16:18, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:17:03PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >> POSIX defines a portable pthread_key_t API for per-thread data. GCC and
> >> C11 have two different forms of per-thread data that
On 20 June 2013 16:18, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:17:03PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> POSIX defines a portable pthread_key_t API for per-thread data. GCC and
>> C11 have two different forms of per-thread data that are generally faster
>> than the POSIX API, where they are availa
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:17:03PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> POSIX defines a portable pthread_key_t API for per-thread data. GCC and
> C11 have two different forms of per-thread data that are generally faster
> than the POSIX API, where they are available. This commit adds a
> macro-based wrapper
POSIX defines a portable pthread_key_t API for per-thread data. GCC and
C11 have two different forms of per-thread data that are generally faster
than the POSIX API, where they are available. This commit adds a
macro-based wrapper, DEFINE_PER_THREAD_DATA, that takes advantage of the
GCC extension
10 matches
Mail list logo
