Peter Dimov wrote:
Yuval Ronen wrote:
Of course we want Microsoft to offer this threading model to C programmers, but it's the job of the C standard committee to define the exact syntax. This standard C syntax might as well be the exact POSIX syntax, no problem by me. But it doesn't really matter one way or the other, as long as the C syntax accepted is a good one.
Doesn't this answer your original question, which was "why do we want Microsoft to ship a pthread layer"? They would have to, either way.
Microsoft might as well have to implement a pthread layer, but that's non of our business, as long as they comply with the C/C++ standard.
The only question left is whether we want two incompatible C APIs to the same underlying model, only one of which works on Windows, or just one. It seems to me that it is in our best interest to want the latter.
We would have only one C API, and it will work on Windows. The allegedly second C API is hidden and non of us should care about it.