From: Jens Maurer (Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-18 13:17:05
Mattias Flodin wrote:
> Speaking of atomic access, I've been thinking about the sig_atomic_t type
> discussed earlier. Wouldn't it be useful with an portable atomic-access
> integer type? In systems where sig_atomic_t exists as an atomic type, this
> could be simply a typedef.
I'm against overloading the semantics of sig_atomic_t. The type
sig_atomic_t serves a specific purpose: Communications between signal
handlers and the "main" program. We should not put threading semantics
on top of it.
Jens Maurer