| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 930.1 | | TLE::SHAMIM | | Tue Apr 22 1997 10:35 | 13 |
|
>> Should $curthread be such an ugly number?
yes, because the thread ids as assigned by the kernel on 3.2 systems
are numbers of the form: 0xfffffc0003669b80, which when taken in decimal
turn out to be ugly -ve numbers.
Perhaps, we should print them in hex so they won't look that ugly ??
Note that on 4.0 systems, the thread ids are small +ve integers, so it does
not make much difference being in hex or decimal.
shamim
|
| 930.2 | | CXXC::MJHANS | Matthew Hanselman, DEC C/C++ | Tue Apr 22 1997 12:11 | 14 |
| I don't have access to ealier versions of ladebug on 3.2 systems; if
this is relatively new behavior, I'd say definitely change it.
Otherwise, I'd just vote to have you guys print it out differently. As a
user, I got worried that ladebug was confused (i.e. it looked like
ladebug was expecting a positive number & was getting a negative
number, so I figured my program must be trashed).
Printing it out in either hex or unsigned decimal would be fine.
Probably hex would be better, as the number 0xfffffc0003669b80 would be
even bigger in decimal.
Thanks for the explanation.
- Matt
|
| 930.3 | | TLE::SHAMIM | | Tue Apr 22 1997 14:15 | 13 |
| >> I don't have access to ealier versions of ladebug on 3.2 systems; if
>> this is relatively new behavior, I'd say definitely change it.
This is not new behaviour in terms of the output of curthread.
And I don't understand what you would want us to change in this context ??
It is not under our control to change the thread ids.
We can only print them. And printing them in hex is the only other alternative
that I can see.
shamim
|
| 930.4 | | CXXC::MJHANS | Matthew Hanselman, DEC C/C++ | Tue Apr 22 1997 14:46 | 14 |
| >This is not new behaviour in terms of the output of curthread.
>
>And I don't understand what you would want us to change in this context ??
> It is not under our control to change the thread ids.
>
> We can only print them. And printing them in hex is the only other alternative
> that I can see.
The "it" that I was referring to was the way in which it's printed out;
if anything here is new behavior, definitely change the way it's
printed out. If it's the way it always worked, maybe change the way
it's printed out.
- Matt
|