Magnus Hagander wrote:
> You interested in trying to code up a patch to verify that? ;)
>
>
Practical reality says that I won't get to this before the next version
of Windows is released.
I don't want to promise something I can't deliver.
>> If there were any desire to provide a MT-aware postmaster, the same
>> technique of masking
>> signals except on a signal thread might apply.
>>
>
> Define MT-aware :-) It's certainly MT-aware in the fact that it's
> already MT... But there is no interest in making the actual backends
> launch as threads in the postmaster - at least not currently.
>
I seem to remember being slapped about for daring to suggest using a
threaded embedded
language even if only one thread calls into the core, on the ground that
the signals might not
go to the right thread. So I'm assuming that a thread-aware build would
generally mask async
signals and wait for them in a specific thread in sigwait, which would
effectively match the
Win32 model (for a threaded build).
On the other hand, I'd normally regard signals as the work of the devil
and prefer to send
a wakeup via some other IPC, for pretty much that reason, but there you go.
James
