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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
