search for: 9567092f

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "9567092f".

Did you mean: 567092
2012 Dec 02
1
[LLVMdev] Use rand_r() instead of non-reentrant thread-unsafe rand() in GetRandomNumber()
...- >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Justin Holewinski >>> >>> >> > -- Thanks, Justin Holewinski -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121201/9567092f/attachment.html>
2012 Dec 01
0
[LLVMdev] Use rand_r() instead of non-reentrant thread-unsafe rand() in GetRandomNumber()
Correcting my patch, reg. __thread stuff I'm not very familiar with. - D. 2012/12/1 Dmitry Mikushin <dmitry at kernelgen.org> > Agreed, done. > > One thing I'm not sure about is this statement in docs: > > POSIX.1-2008 marks *rand_r*() as obsolete. > > - And... what is the replacement? > > > 2012/12/1 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at
2012 Dec 01
2
[LLVMdev] Use rand_r() instead of non-reentrant thread-unsafe rand() in GetRandomNumber()
Agreed, done. One thing I'm not sure about is this statement in docs: POSIX.1-2008 marks *rand_r*() as obsolete. - And... what is the replacement? 2012/12/1 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> > If we're keeping the state locally now, perhaps we should store it in a > per-thread variable. I know rand() isn't thread safe to begin with, but it > seems