[geos-devel] Thread Safe CAPI RFC acceptance...

[Howard Butler]

On Nov 3, 2008, at 6:10 PM, Martin Davis wrote:

> I agree.  Some parts of the JTS API are not reentrant, and I'm not  
> sure if this got transferred to GEOS.  And I have no idea what other  
> non-reentrant things might have crept in.
> Since I can't vote knowledgeably, I will simply abstain.  (Like a  
> good Canadian...)

Now, if you were an an Real American (TM) like me, you would have no  
problem voting unknowledgeably.  Vetos have the consequences in GEOS'  
governance, not +1's :)

I'm at a loss to suggest a cleaner way to assure and describe thread  
safety in GEOS' C API than the RFC.  I don't much care for the  
function call duplication, but it's unfortunately 'C', and we don't  
have function overloading :)

I wonder if maybe we shouldn't put the threadsafe API in its own  
entire header, but maybe it's too late to muck up the RFC with that  
discussion.

I'll +1 GEOS RFC 3 http://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC3 as it is

Howard