[Mono-list] Intrinsicly Non-Portable?

[Christian Ratliff]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dick,

  Do you handle the socket situation I describe? Under Winsock it is
possible to tie a socket to a Win32 EVENT object and wait for it. If
this isn't supported, I would be glad to work on it.

christian

+-----+
Christian Ratliff <cratliff@lily.org>
lily Development Group
"This is the very perfection of man, 
  to find out his own imperfections" -  St. Augustine



- -----Original Message-----
From: mono-list-admin@ximian.com [mailto:mono-list-admin@ximian.com]
On Behalf Of Dick Porter
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 6:43 PM
To: mono-list@ximian.com
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] Intrinsicly Non-Portable?


On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 12:23:59AM +0200, Serge wrote:
> I also think that some pieces are hard to implement efficiently yet
>  portable, Threading.Interlocked for example - implemented with
> mutex  it's surely less efficient.

I think a pthread spinlock would do nicely here.

A lot of the win32 API maps reasonably cleanly to a pthreads
implementation. The only really hairy part is waiting for multiple
objects at once, 
especially where you need to return all or nothing.  I've just
realised that I don't cope with the case where multiple types are
being waited for, the waitall flag is TRUE, and only one type of
handle satisfies the wait :-( (Each type of handle is waited for
separately).


- - Dick


_______________________________________________
Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO/7h+rZBtyfwMNgGEQKjJACfbqq+cnuLOn+Acx2py2EGBmKMg2kAoIlE
sk1CiKJIAgazqJV7cndSfs2d
=5se1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----