From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-06-30 15:59:52
|
Bugs item #547989, was opened at 2002-04-24 11:57 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by vasiljevic You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110894&aid=547989&group_id=10894 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: 48. Threading Group: obsolete: 8.4a5 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 7 Private: No Submitted By: Donal K. Fellows (dkf) Assigned to: Zoran Vasiljevic (vasiljevic) Summary: Undocumented public API: threads Initial Comment: The following publically-named API functions are undocumented. Tcl_GetAllocMutex (mac/tclMacThrd.c) Tcl_GetAllocMutex (unix/tclUnixThrd.c) Tcl_GetAllocMutex (win/tclWinThrd.c) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Zoran Vasiljevic (vasiljevic) Date: 2007-06-30 17:59 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=95086 Originator: NO I have very little experience with stub exported calls. It is definitely so that above are to be used only internally and should therefore be named as TclpGetAllocMutex or such. They should not be exported. So what to do? Wait for 9.0 and scrap them out of the public API? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Andreas Kupries (andreas_kupries) Date: 2002-05-14 21:15 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=75003 It is also exported through the public stub table. Its description however indicates that it is more an internal function required for the initialization of the memory allocation subsystem (MAS) of the core. IMHO making it public makes sense only if we allow the replacement of the MAS by an external system. Something I consider unlikely. Hm, ports to PDA's ? ... No, not even for such. They most likely will use a different allocator, yes, but that is part of the porting work. The change is not externally visible. So, my recommendation for now is to not to document this function and to make it internal in the next major release of the core. I will assign this now to Jeff to get his opinion too. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110894&aid=547989&group_id=10894 |