Search Results

Search found 1638 results on 66 pages for 'multithreading'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 60/66 | < Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >

  • How to call 3 threads sequentially many times?

    - by Hello
    How to call 3 threads sequentially many times? For example: In iteration 1, execution order should be "Thread0-thread1-thread2" then in iteration 2 should be same i.e "Thread0 - thread1-thread2" and so on. The sample code is just executing 3 threads only once. It is not going to 2nd iteration. Thread0 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc0, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); Thread1 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc1, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); Thread2 = CreateThread( NULL,0,ThreadProc2, NULL, CREATE_SUSPENDED, &ThreadID); for(i=0;i<iterations;i++) //Iterations in calling threads { ResumeThread(Thread0); WaitForSingleObject(Thread0, INFINITE); ResumeThread(Thread1); WaitForSingleObject(Thread1, INFINITE); ResumeThread(Thread2); WaitForSingleObject(Thread2, INFINITE); } // Close thread and semaphore handles

    Read the article

  • Iterators over a LInked List in a Game in Java

    - by Matthew
    I am using OpenGl in android and they have a callback method called draw that gets called with out my control. (As fast as the device can handle if I am not mistaken) I have a list of "GameObjects" that have a .draw method and a .update method. I have two different threads that handle each of those. So, the question is, can I declare two different iterators in two different methods in two different threads that iterate over the same Linked List? If so, do I simply declare ListIterator<GameObject> l = objets.listIterator() each time I want a new iterator and it won't interfere with other iterators?

    Read the article

  • [java] run 2 threads simultaneously

    - by lamsaitat
    hi all, in the case of an IM client. i have made 2 separate threads to handle sending packets (by std io) and receiving packets. the question is how to make these 2 threads run simultaneously so that i can keep prompting for input while at the same time be ready to receive packets at any time? i have already tried setting a timer but the data is always lost receiving.

    Read the article

  • Queues And Wait Handles in C#

    - by Michael Covelli
    I've had the following code in my application for some years and have never seen an issue from it. while ((PendingOrders.Count > 0) || (WaitHandle.WaitAny(CommandEventArr) != 1)) { lock (PendingOrders) { if (PendingOrders.Count > 0) { fbo = PendingOrders.Dequeue(); } else { fbo = null; } } // Do Some Work if fbo is != null } Where CommandEventArr is made up of the NewOrderEvent (an auto reset event) and the ExitEvent (a manual reset event). But I just realized today that its not thread safe at all. If this thread gets interrupted right after the first (PendingOrder.Count 0) check has returned false. And then the other thread both enqueues an order and sets the NewOrderEvent before I get a chance to wait on it, the body of the while loop will never run. What's the usual pattern used with a Queue and an AutoResetEvent to fix this and do what I'm trying to do with the code above?

    Read the article

  • Running a loop (such as one for a mock webserver) within a thread

    - by bob c
    I'm trying to run a mock webserver within a thread within a class. I've tried passing the class' @server property to the thread block but as soon as I try to do server.accept the thread stops. Is there some way to make this work? I want to basically be able to run a webserver off of this script while still taking user input via stdin.gets. Is this possible? class Server def initialize() @server = TCPServer.new(8080) end def run() @thread = Thread.new(@server) { |server| while true newsock = server.accept puts "some stuff after accept!" next if !newsock # some other stuff end } end end def processCommand() # some user commands here end test = Server.new while true do processCommand(STDIN.gets) end In the above sample, the thread dies on server.accept

    Read the article

  • c# run process without freezing my App's GUI

    - by Data-Base
    Hello, I want to start a process (calling another program), currently the external program takes time (it is normal)! but it freezes my GUI I saw allot of examples and I'm learning, it is hard to figure it out, trying to read and learn threading, but it is not that easy (at least for me) and good simple tutorial or code sample? cheers

    Read the article

  • Is a Critical Section around an integer getter and setter redundant?

    - by Tim Gradwell
    Do critical sections inside trivial int accessors actually do anything useful? int GetFoo() { CriticalSection(crit_id); return foo; } void SetFoo(int value) { CriticalSection(crit_id); foo = value; } Is it possible for two threads to be attempting to read and write foo simultaneously? I'd have thought 'no' unless integers are written byte-at-a-time, in which case I can see the use. But I'd have though modern cpus would read/write integers in a single atomic action...

    Read the article

  • Thread toggling

    - by sid
    Hi all, In Ubuntu, I am running 2 'C' applications, When I press key up/down the applications are alternatively getting the events. What might be the problem/solution? Ex: I have 'A application' and 'B application', I launch 'A application' and press the key up/down its working fine. If I simultaneously launch 'B application' and focus is on 'B application' then pressing key up/down will toggle between 'A application' & 'B application' so 2 times I have to press the key to move on 'B application'(focus is on 'B application'). 'A application' and 'B application' are threads. Thanks in advance-opensid

    Read the article

  • Multi threading question..

    - by dotnet-practitioner
    I would like to invoke heavy duty method dowork on a separate thread and kill it if its taking longer than 3 seconds. Is there any problem with the following code? class Class1 { /// <summary> /// The main entry point for the application. /// </summary> [STAThread] static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("starting new thread"); Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(dowork)); t.Start(); DateTime start = DateTime.Now; TimeSpan span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); bool wait = true; while (wait == true) { if (span.Seconds > 3) { t.Abort(); wait = false; } span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); } Console.WriteLine("ending new thread after seconds = {0}", span.Seconds); Console.WriteLine("all done"); Console.ReadLine(); } static void dowork() { Console.WriteLine("doing heavy work inside hello"); Thread.Sleep(7000); Console.WriteLine("*** finished**** doing heavy work inside hello"); } }

    Read the article

  • [C++] Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    Read the article

  • How do I pause main() until all other threads have died?

    - by thechiman
    In my program, I am creating several threads in the main() method. The last line in the main method is a call to System.out.println(), which I don't want to call until all the threads have died. I have tried calling Thread.join() on each thread however that blocks each thread so that they execute sequentially instead of in parallel. Is there a way to block the main() thread until all other threads have finished executing? Here is the relevant part of my code: public static void main(String[] args) { //some other initialization code //Make array of Thread objects Thread[] racecars = new Thread[numberOfRaceCars]; //Fill array with RaceCar objects for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racecars[i] = new RaceCar(laps, args[i]); } //Call start() on each Thread for(int i=0; i<numberOfRaceCars; i++) { racecars[i].start(); try { racecars[i].join(); //This is where I tried to using join() //It just blocks all other threads until the current //thread finishes. } catch(InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } //This is the line I want to execute after all other Threads have finished System.out.println("It's Over!"); } Thanks for the help guys! Eric

    Read the article

  • Timer in Java swing

    - by Yesha
    I'm trying to replace Thread.sleep with a java swing timer as I hear that is much better for graphics. Before, I had something set up like this, but it was interfering with the graphics. while(counter < array.size){ Thread.sleep(array.get(counter).startTime); //do first task Thread.sleep(array.get(counter).secondTime); //do second task Thread.sleep(array.get(counter).thirdTime); //do third task counter++ } Now, I'm trying to replace each Thread.sleep with one of these and then I have the actual events that happen after this, but it does not seem to be waiting at all. int test = array.get(counter).time; ActionListener taskPerformer = new ActionListener(){ public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent evt){ } }; Timer t = new Timer(test, taskPerformer); t.setRepeats(false); t.start(); Basically, how do I ensure that the program will wait without giving it any code to execute inside of the timer? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Is it save to read global data from multiple threads?

    - by user362515
    The scenario is as follows: Create an instance of a class (std::map) and sore it as global variable. Spawn threads. Threads read and use the same global instance of the class All spawned threads quit Global class instance is destroyed No mutex, no thread modifies the global class instance. Is it ok? Thank You

    Read the article

  • Real World Examples of read-write in concurrent software

    - by Richard Fabian
    I'm looking for real world examples of needing read and write access to the same value in concurrent systems. In my opinion, many semaphores or locks are present because there's no known alternative (to the implementer,) but do you know of any patterns where mutexes seem to be a requirement? In a way I'm asking for candidates for the standard set of HARD problems for concurrent software in the real world.

    Read the article

  • C# start a static thread

    - by user595605
    I have a Queue of items I want to process in a thread, and any instance of a class can add items to the Queue to be processed. My idea for doing this is to have a static Thread in the class that processes the items, the only problem is that I don't know where to start this thread, since I can't start it in its initialization. Is there a way I can start a static thread? Or should I be changing the architecture completely?

    Read the article

  • vs2002: c# multi threading question..

    - by dotnet-practitioner
    I would like to invoke heavy duty method dowork on a separate thread and kill it if its taking longer than 3 seconds. Is there any problem with the following code? class Class1 { /// <summary> /// The main entry point for the application. /// </summary> /// [STAThread] static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("starting new thread"); Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(dowork)); t.Start(); DateTime start = DateTime.Now; TimeSpan span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); bool wait = true; while (wait == true) { if (span.Seconds>3) { t.Abort(); wait = false; } span = DateTime.Now.Subtract(start); } Console.WriteLine("ending new thread after seconds = {0}", span.Seconds); Console.WriteLine("all done"); Console.ReadLine(); } static void dowork() { Console.WriteLine("doing heavy work inside hello"); Thread.Sleep(7000); Console.WriteLine("*** finished**** doing heavy work inside hello"); } }

    Read the article

  • Dispatcher.CheckAccess() isn't working from my console application, is there a better way.

    - by zimmer62
    I wrote an application in WPF / VB and separated the business logic and UI into different projects. The business layer uses a serial port which runs on a different thread, Now that I'm trying to write a command line interface for the same business layer, it seems to fail when .Invoke() is called. (no error, just doesn't work) I'm pretty sure the reason I had to add in checkaccess and .invoke was because I have collections that would be changed during processing the serial port data and wanted the NotifyCollectionChanged to be handled by WPF data binding. (The reason I'm not 100% sure is because it was months ago I wrote that part and it all worked great from the GUI, now adding the console app has made me rethink some of this) I would like my business layer to run these processes on the thread they were created, I need this to work from both my GUI version and the command line version. Am I misusing the Dispatcher in my business layer? Is there a better way to handle an event from the serial port, and then return to the main thread to processes the data?

    Read the article

  • Any reason NOT to slap the 'synchronized' keyword everywhere?

    - by unknown
    In my java project, almost every non-static method I've written is synchronized. I've decided to fix up some code today, by removing most of the synchronized keywords. Right there I created several threading issues that took quite a while to fix, with no increase in performance. In the end I reverted everything. I don't see anyone else writing code with "synchronized" everywhere. So is there any reason I shouldn't have "synchronized" everywhere? What if I don't care too much about performance (ie. the method isn't called more than once every few seconds)?

    Read the article

  • Why does java.util.concurrent.ArrayBlockingQueue use 'while' loops instead of 'if' around calls to

    - by theFunkyEngineer
    I have been playing with my own version of this, using 'if', and all seems to be working fine. Of course this will break down horribly if signalAll() is used instead of signal(), but if only one thread at a time is notified, how can this go wrong? Their code here - check out the put() and take() methods; a simpler and more-to-the-point implementation can be seen at the top of the JavaDoc for Condition. Relevant portion of my implementation below. public Object get() { lock.lock(); try { if( items.size() < 1 ) hasItems.await(); Object poppedValue = items.getLast(); items.removeLast(); hasSpace.signal(); return poppedValue; } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return null; } finally { lock.unlock(); } } public void put(Object item) { lock.lock(); try { if( items.size() >= capacity ) hasSpace.await(); items.addFirst(item); hasItems.signal(); return; } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } finally { lock.unlock(); } } P.S. I know that generally, particularly in lib classes like this, one should let the exceptions percolate up.

    Read the article

  • Can two or more threads iterate over the same List<t> without any problems?

    - by CodingCrapper
    Talking about System.Collections.Generic.List here. With example below can Method1 and Method2 execute and the same time, on different threads without any problems? Thanks class Test { private readonly List<MyData> _data; public Test() { _data = LoadData(); } private List<MyData> LoadData() { //Get data from dv. } public void Method1() { foreach (var list in _data) { //do something } } public void Method2() { foreach (var list in _data) { //do something } } }

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >