Subj : Re: workq: condvar vs semaphore To : comp.programming.threads From : David Tiktin Date : Fri Aug 05 2005 02:53 pm On 05 Aug 2005, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> BTW, I haven't read Dave's book (yet!), so I apologize if this is >> a topic he covers. > > http://groups.google.de/group/comp.programming.threads/msg/bdea58ba > c016480e Wow, that was fast. Thanks for the reference! That's a terrific discussion. Do I understand that the point is (in the context of my question) that condvars are just the right tool for the job? (And I should get the book!) If so, and I haven't got them (Win32, say), what's the next best thing? Remember, I'm asking this specifically in the context of the workq example. I'm not asking for a general replacement since I'm assuming that convars just can't be implemented correctly in Win32. (Isn't that the conclusion of the recent thread on that subject?) Or am I not following you? Dave -- D.a.v.i.d T.i.k.t.i.n t.i.k.t.i.n [at] a.d.v.a.n.c.e.d.r.e.l.a.y [dot] c.o.m .