Re: [AD] public thread API

[Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2008-08-06, Elias Pschernig <elias@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 11:04 +1000, Peter Wang wrote:
> > 
> > As in, al_create_thread, al_lock_mutex, al_broadcast_cond.  Which looks
> > fine actually.  We should do it for consistency.
> > 
> 
> Oh, something else:
> 
> int al_cond_timedwait(ALLEGRO_COND *cond, ALLEGRO_MUTEX *mutex,
>                       const ALLEGRO_COND_TIMEOUT timeout);
> 
> What about using "double timeout", and specifying it in seconds?

This reminds me of a similar decision in the events API that we
discussed, which I forgot to implement.  We should adopt the same
solution for al_cond_timedwait as for the events function.

At any rate, it should be an absolute timeout as al_cond_timedwait()
*needs* to be called in a loop.  With relative timeouts you're
obliged to keep track of how long al_cond_timedwait() took
and subtract that for the next iteration of the loop.

Peter