[c++-pthreads] Re: C++ and posix threads

[Nathan Myers]

On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 03:28:17PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 08:54:06PM -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
> > Do you _really_ see breaking just about every existing thread-safe 
> > library as a minor change?
> 
> Yes.  Primarily because I disagree that changing the throw status
> of printf will have this effect.

Have you ever coded C++?  Exception-safe code depends on knowing 
where exceptions may occur.  While it is very rare that code depends 
on returned results from ::printf, other calls have rather more 
complicated result semantics.

> > Nobody proposed changing POSIX.  
> > 
> > The proposed semantics is for the C++ _binding_ to POSIX, which 
> > (I understand) doesn't exist yet.
> 
> If you are seriously suggesting that printf work differently
> depending on whether the object file is linked into a C or a
> C++ program, then I give up.  That is NOT an option.  You will
> get absolutely ZERO uptake from library implementors.

Richard, all these "ZERO uptake" remarks make it very hard to discuss 
design decisions calmly.  

It sounds like you're saying that if the right thing for C++ is 
something Ulrich doesn't care for, we must shadow the C functions, 
in libstdc++, with wrapper code.  That would be unfortunate.

Nathan Myers
ncm at cantirp.org