Re: permissions (and other) problems

On Tuesday, September 17, 2002, at 07:39 PM, Philip Martin wrote:

> Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
>
>> the last remaining question is "if signal itself isn't portable, is
>> sig_atomic_t?" according to all i've read, and what philip has said,
>> about the only thing that's safe to do in a signal handler is to set a
>> sig_atomic_t variable... if that typedef isn't considered portable,
>> it complicates life considerably...
>
> apr_atomic_t? It appears to be unsigned int on my platform, whereas
> sig_atomic_t is plain int. That probably doesn't matter, and if it
> does it's APR's problem!

the thing that worries me about apr_atomic_t is that if atomic ops
aren't available on the platform, it falls back to an implementation
using mutexes, which means that apr_atomic_{inc,dec,get,set} wouldn't
be safe to use in a signal handler.

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                    Remember, any design flaw you're
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net      sufficiently snide about becomes
http://electricjellyfish.net/     a feature.       -- Dan Sugalski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org