Re: Should I use mutex in this context?
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 23:28:46 -0400, Tommy <tommy767@gmail.com> wrote:
No offense intended, but your program contains a number of undesirable and
naive practices and assumptions. I'll point out the major ones and try to
avoid nitpicking.
HA! An oxymoron if I ever saw one. :-)
Clearly, you don't know what the word "oxymoron" means. If I had intended
to offend, I would have used denigrating language. If I were to have
nitpicked, I would've talked about "void main", the naivet? of using printf
instead of puts or fputs to print strings that have no format specifiers
(it's dangerous if a % sign slips into the printf format string), and so
forth. But we were talking about multithreading, so I didn't.
I pulled a perfectly fine 1998
old program and I think you need to review the differences of
BeginThread/Ex and CreateThread, etc - a subject I long forgotten and
don't worry about anymore.
That's just nonsensical.
The fact the WFSO waits on an active
handle shows that you need to review the RTL
I referred to the documentation and pointed you to it WRT the flaw in your
program, for crying out loud.
and to question what I
mean about 1 reader thread and 1 writer thread and especially the idea
of how that relates to "contention", well, I don't understand why the
brush back but only to see it as yet another "pounding" of the chest,
looking for something beyond cooperative newsgroup participation with
cockiness and rudeness.
You're wrong again. I genuinely didn't understand what you were getting at.
If "cooperative newsgroup participation" means agreeing with just anything,
you have come to the wrong place. Why not clarify your point instead of
replying with all that ad hominem nonsense?
If that makes you feel better, the more power
to you. Me? I grew of that phase long ago.
The only thing you seem to have grown out of is the ability to carry on a
meaningful conversation (assuming you ever had the ability). You're just
spouting rude, arrogant blather at this point, and it's tiresome.
In any case, I am not here to argue with you. Indeed you have a
greater defined life and role here as an MVP so I am not going to
challenge you any further - i.e. I am not here to make your life
harder. But I should advise that you don't think for one minute what
you say is gospel over others. There are indeed many who don't care
to be a MVP, nor that you are, don't have the time and have as much as
experience and possibly even more than you do on a subject long cooked
- i.e, there is nothing new being said.
I stand my input here.
Although you believe you understand the things that are being discussed in
this thread, what you say indicates that you do not. That you continue to
respond in this vein is all the prodding I need to call it quits. All I can
recommend at this point is that you save this discussion and study it when
you have more time to digest what you've been told. Cheers.
--
Doug Harrison
Visual C++ MVP