Re: Threads

From: scleary_at_[hidden]
Date: 2000-08-04 09:33:27

> As for those wanting to start with vast definitions...
> 
> I'm not sure why we need to do this.  Most definitions are well known 
> to anyone who's done concurrent programming.  Unless we're striving 
> to come up with new jargon there's nothing to define.

Everyone knows what a "mutex" is.  However, the problem comes with the
precise definition of a mutex.  Is it recursive (i.e., can a thread lock it
if it already owns it)?  Is it statically-initializable (so it can be used
in program startup/shutdown code)?  These questions demonstrate the need for
a hard definition even of the simplest of synchronization primitives.

        -Steve