home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!mips!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!ucbvax!PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM!KENKAHN
- From: KENKAHN@PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM ("Kenneth A. Kahn")
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer
- Subject: Re: Threads et all
- Message-ID: <9208131933.AA14154@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
- Date: 13 Aug 92 19:27:21 GMT
- Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
- Lines: 22
-
- Organization: Staff of IBM Fellow - NetWork Computing
- Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
- News-Software: UReply 3.0
- X-X-From: KENKAHN@PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Kahn)
- References: <1992Aug13.190952.21123@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
-
- In <1992Aug13.190952.21123@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> Les Hartzman writes:
- >
- > 1) Does thread 1 exist for any other reason than to start
- > other threads and to process the interrupt/kill signals?
- >
- Depends on what you want to do. I have a number of programs where Thread 1
- contains most of the processing for the process; e.g. it might contain a
- DosReadQueue to ccept work that other threads actually perform. It's very
- common to have thread 1 act as the 'controler' thread and have it assign
- work to other threads as necessary. Then again, I have a few applications
- where thread 1 does it's thing and then goes away.
- >
- > 2) Can ANY thread in a process create its own queue(s)?
- >
- Any thread can create a Queue but any other thread in the process can access
- it via the QueueHandle.
-