Hello Haitao, On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Peng Haitao <penght@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 01/22/2014 04:29 PM, Andre Majorel wrote: >>>> If that is the case, how about : >>>> >>>> These functions can be safely used in multithreaded >>>> applications, as long as the locale is not changed during >>>> their execution. >>> >>> The above sentence is OK, but I think added setlocale(3) is >>> better, thanks. >>> >>> These functions can be safely used in multithreaded >>> applications, as long as setlocale(3) is not called >>> to change the locale during their execution. >> >> This wording can be interpreted to mean that calling setlocale() >> *is* permitted as long as the locale doesn't change. If that is >> really what you mean, then no further objections from me. > > That is what I mean. Can I just confirm what I understand from this conversation: * A call to strtod() is thread-safe so long as no other thread uses setlocale() to change the locale *during* the execution of strtod(). * If a call to setlocale() changes the locale *before* a call to strtod(), then the call to strtod() is still thread safe. Correct? Thanks, Michael > -- > Best Regards, > Peng > >> Otherwise, my recommendation would be >> >> These functions can be safely used in multithreaded >> applications, as long as setlocale() is not called during >> their execution. >> > -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- 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
