From 445837754eadd0d3912a7977838280e036766845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andy Wingo Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 21:55:16 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] regexec comment fix * libguile/regex-posix.c (SCM_DEFINE): Remove comment about threadsafety, given that regexec does appear to be threadsafe. --- libguile/regex-posix.c | 11 ----------- 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/libguile/regex-posix.c b/libguile/regex-posix.c index bec0f89fb..9350fb38b 100644 --- a/libguile/regex-posix.c +++ b/libguile/regex-posix.c @@ -244,17 +244,6 @@ SCM_DEFINE (scm_regexp_exec, "regexp-exec", 2, 2, 0, "@end table") #define FUNC_NAME s_scm_regexp_exec { - /* We used to have an SCM_DEFER_INTS, and then later an - SCM_CRITICAL_SECTION_START, around the regexec() call. Can't quite - remember what defer ints was for, but a critical section would only be - wanted now if we think regexec() is not thread-safe. The posix spec - - http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/regcomp.html - - reads like regexec is meant to be both thread safe and reentrant - (mentioning simultaneous use in threads, and in signal handlers). So - for now believe no protection needed. */ - int status, nmatches, offset; regmatch_t *matches; char *c_str;