[openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- From: "Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:31:52 EDT (-0200)
> On Tuesday 10 December 2002 11:51, you wrote:
>
> > The definition I read didn't say that a reentrant function has to
> > return
> > the same thing each time it's called with the same parameters.
>
> That would be "idempotent," not re-entrant.
A function f: X -> X is called idempotent, if f * f = f. The above
definition matches something like stateless deterministic, I would say.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting
- » [openbeos] Re: POSIX thread safety, was: Re: Waiting and waiting