[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Deadlock in NSLog
From: |
David Ayers |
Subject: |
Re: Deadlock in NSLog |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:12:03 +0200 |
Am Freitag, den 01.08.2008, 12:06 +0100 schrieb David Chisnall:
> It appears that GNUstep is using the ObjC runtime mutex, which tries
> to emulate a recursive mutex using a non-recursive mutex. It looked
> like there was a potential for deadlock in here when I looked at the
> code a few months ago. Since GNUstep depends on pthreads anyway, it
> might be better to use the pthread functions directly, rather than
> going through a buggy abstraction layer.
I don't believe that bypassing the objc abstraction layer is a good
idea.
GNUstep and GNU ObjC have been ported to platforms that may not be
supported be pthreads. In particular I remember that FreeBSD at on
point used a different threading library that claimed POSIX/pthread
compatibility.
I would instead try to create a libobjc test case a report a bug against
libobjc to get it fixed there. Now with all this ObjC 2.0 activity I
would believe that someone would have get GCC libobjc up to par anyway
on these platforms to be able test it there anyway.
Cheers,
David
- Deadlock in NSLog, David Chisnall, 2008/08/01
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog,
David Ayers <=
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Chisnall, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, Nicola Pero, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Ayers, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Chisnall, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Ayers, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Chisnall, 2008/08/04
- Re: Deadlock in NSLog, David Ayers, 2008/08/04