[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-man
Subject:    Re: pthread_self.3: arith type or structure
From:       Jan Engelhardt <jengelh () medozas ! de>
Date:       2009-11-06 22:05:23
Message-ID: alpine.LSU.2.00.0911062303530.28948 () obet ! zrqbmnf ! qr
[Download RAW message or body]


On Friday 2009-11-06 22:50, bill o gallmeister wrote:
>
>> in man-pages 3.23, one can read in pthread_self.3:
>> 
>> 
>> "POSIX.1 allows an implementation wide freedom in choosing the type
>> used to represent a thread ID; for example, representation using
>> either an arithmetic type or a structure is permitted."
>> 
>> http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/systypes.h.html
>> however mentions "all of the types are defined as arithmetic types".
>> Would you know which of the two documentations (linux-man-pages,
>> opengroup's website) is correct?
>
>It depends on which spec the implementation conforms to.  An Opengroup conformant
>system would need to provide an arithmetic type, whereas an IEEE 1003.1c-1995
>conformant system could get away with a more relaxed specification of pthread_t.
>
>I can speak to the POSIX spec for pthread_t.  The idea was to allow it to be
>implemented as any sort of type;  hence the provision of pthread_equal() to
>compare two pthread_t variables.

I picked up the pthread_t discussion from a bit of IRC.
Later message exchanges mentioned that the specification was changed
already again in POSIX.1-2004 to make pthread_t the one exception
to the arithmetic rule; other than that, I also hear that OS_X
makes pthread_t a pointer type.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]