Subj : Re: workq: condvar vs semaphore
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : Sean Kelly
Date : Fri Aug 05 2005 03:43 pm

David Tiktin wrote:
>
> 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?

Yes, they are :)  But if a third-party condvar implementation isn't
your cup of tea (Boost has one, and a thread pool as well IIRC) then
you can solve the problem a number of different ways.  They might just
not be quite as efficient, or they might have prioritization issues in
some cases.  All of them probably involve Windows events or semaphores.
 A final alternative would be to use the built-in Windows thread
pooling mechanism.  Do a search for QueueUserWorkItem and
BindIoCompletionCallback to see the two prepackaged choices available
(or dig a bit deeper and use completion ports directly).


Sean

.