Re: bugs regarding late g_thread_init() calls

[John Ehresman <jpe wingware com>]

Torsten Schoenfeld wrote:
> >     if (!g_thread_supported ())
> >         g_thread_init (NULL);
> >
> > bzzzzz!  g_thread_supported called too early.
>
> g_thread_supported is actually a macro.  It's another name for
> g_threads_got_initialized basically.  So the idiom above should be safe,
> right?

Just $.02, but does this mean that a programmer need to be an expert in 
the status of each symbol just to initialize a program properly?  It 
seems to me that there is an evolution here from glib being a library 
that works readily without threads to one that usually assumes that 
threads are going to be initialized and probably used.  I don't know 
what that means in terms of api, but it might help to explicitly note 
that this is a change.

One more thing -- isn't there a binary compatibility issue here?  If a 
program worked with 2.6, doesn't it need to work with new releases 
without recompilation in order for binary compatibility to be preserved?

Cheers,

John