Re: [PATCH 22/40] Windows: Implement asynchronous functions as threads.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thursday 28 February 2008 16:28, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> > In upload-pack we must explicitly close the output channel of rev-list.
> > (On Unix, the channel is closed automatically because process that runs
> > rev-list terminates.)
>
> When I read this patch, my impression was that it litters the source code
> with #ifdef's.  IMO this makes the code less readable, and as a
> consequence easer to fsck up.
>
> Unfortunately, I have no idea how to help that, other than implementing
> compat/thread.[ch], abstracting the thread functions, and introducing a
> NO_FORK Makefile variable and preprocessor constant.
>
> Hmpf.

The number of #ifdef/#endif is already at a minimum unless you are willing to 
have entire functions in separate #ifdef/#else/#endif branches. Whether to 
have compat/thread.[ch] or not is just a question of whether you want to have 
asynchronous functions in threads also on Unix or not.

-- Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux