<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- Generated on Fri, 25 May 2012 17:49:28 -0700 -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <atom:link href="http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <title>Intel Software Network Comments Feed</title>
    <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading</link>
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <item>
      <title>By Lilian</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ You can clearly see that the version that uses pthread was intentionally written ugly and added additional checks to make it look longer and uglier. "status" variable for the thread declared and not even used...
I do agree that the silk version "looks better" but there is no need to write the other version so bad. ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71671</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:08:37 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71671</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Lilian</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ You can clearly see that the version that uses pthread was intentionally written ugly and added additional checks to make it look longer and uglier. "status" variable for the thread declared and not even used...
I do agree that the silk version "looks better" but there is no need to write the other version so bad. ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71672</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:09:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71672</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By lilian.moraru</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ You can clearly see that the version that uses pthread was intentionally written ugly and added additional checks to make it look longer and uglier. "status" variable for the thread declared and not even used...
I do agree that the silk version "looks better" but there is no need to write the other version so bad. ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71673</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:09:23 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/the-folly-of-do-it-yourself-multithreading/#comment-71673</guid>
    </item>
  </channel></rss>
