17 Jun
2003
17 Jun
'03
1:45 p.m.
Also, even though using localtime_r would work, it might actually not be benefitia performace wise anyway (since it's not exactly cheap to release and retrieve the interpreter lock).
/ David Hedbor
Previous text:
2003-06-17 19:28: Subject: Pike localtime(), threads safe and low level localtime() / localtime_r() ?
There is already a mutex. f_localtime does not release the interpreter lock. Of course, it could still interfere with other threads running non-pike code, but that would not be fixed by adding another mutex.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)