Is pthread_cond_signal(3) man page correct?

[Yuri]

On 28.02.11 2:41, Pieter de Goeje wrote:
> pthread_cond_signal() can indeed wake up more than one thread. That's why you
> should always wrap pthread_cond_wait() in a loop. For example a blocking
> queue could be implemented like this (pseudo code):

Thank you. Now its clear that POSIX allows multiple wake ups.

But my question is: why would the standard define it this way? Why would 
it allow essentially arbitrary number of waiting threads to be woken up 
by one event? I can't think of any practical app that would need "some 
threads to be woken up". It would be natural to expect it to wake 
exactly one thread. So the users won't need to have any special cycles 
like you suggested in your previous post.

What is the underlying reason for POSIX to define it this way and for 
OSes to implement it this way?

Yuri