ANN: H98 FFI Addendum 1.0, Release Candidate 9

[Manuel M T Chakravarty]

Alastair Reid <alastair at reid-consulting-uk.ltd.uk> wrote,

> > There is only one open question: What to do about
> > "threadsafe"?  In the threads discussion, there seemed to be
> > a tendency to not distinguish between "threadsafe" and
> > "safe" after all.  Shall we remove "threadsafe" from 1.0?
> > That's what I tend to and will do unless there are strong
> > arguments to retain "threadsafe".
> 
> I think it should be removed but there should be a section near the start of 
> the document which lists open issues which would include:
> 
> - bindings for other languages
> - issues involving threads (i.e., whatever it is that threadsafe was intended 
> to solve).

The introduction already mentions bindings for other
languages as an open issue.  I have added the following
paragraph to cover threads:

  The second major omission from the present report is the
  definition of the interaction with multithreading in the
  foreign language and, in particular, the treatment of
  thread-local state.  Work on this problem is not
  sufficiently mature to be included into Version 1.0 of the
  report.

Cheers,
Manuel