Re: [sablevm-jchevm] Windows port

James Mansion wrote:

>>In any case, I think that the Windows port should rely on
>>the pthread library written for Windows.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't think that's a very good idea:
>
>1) it has the wrong license (I think - has pthread-Win32 changed?)
>
>2) it uses the relatively high-level Win32 facilities to bodge
>together an emulation of rather lower-level facilities.  If you
>then use that to implement a higher-level abstraction again
>for Java with recursive locks and signals, then its likely to
>be less than optimal.  Better, then, to look at a focussed
>abstraction and implement for both threading models as
>efficiently as you can.  Bear in mind that the Win32
>threading has the weight of a rather large number of host
>systems behind it.
>
>You might be better off with ZThreads if you really don't
>want to do a direct port - or (better) look at the high-level
>implementations you want, and offer them to APR (or APRUtil)
>based on the low-level code in APR.
>
>James
>
>(Also - it would be *really* handy to have a source tree
>thats more or less self-contained and will build on Win32
>with native tools rather than a posix shell emulator)
>
>  
>
Hi James,
 
 I actually agree to Etienne's proposal: that is, calling directly the 
Windows' threads APIs.

Enrico