hmmm. Are you running on a unix system? Maybe you could do this with a named pipe.
have the waiting program open a named pipe for reading and wait.... and have the sending program open the named pipe for writing and send the message. George > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2- > us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Larry Hiscock > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 4:47 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: RE: [U2] Inter-Process Control... > > Yep ... sure miss sem$wait & sem$notify. You could accomplish the same > thing with a simple socket-based protocol. The main process could > listen on > a socket and wait for any of the sub-processes to connect and send a > message > via the socket. > > Larry Hiscock > Western Computer Services > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tom Whitmore > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:25 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: RE: [U2] Inter-Process Control... > > I agree. I wrote two little programs. > > LOCK.TEST1 > 0001 LOCK 60 ELSE CRT '60 LOCKED' > 0002 CRT 'UNLOCKED' > > > LOCK.TEST2 > 0001 UNLOCK 60 > 0002 CRT '60 WAS UNLOCKED' > > LOCK.TEST1 locked 60 displayed "unlocked". > LOCK.TEST2 generated the error ' Program "LOCK.TEST2": Line 1, Lock 60 > not > owned by calling process' and then displayed "60 WAS UNLOCKED". > > As I was playing with the test programs as I type this. it looks like > the > first process needs to perform the first lock. The second process will > then > lock, and wait on the lock until the first process unlocks. I need to > be > able to support many-to-one processes. The "one" process waits on the > lock > and any of the "many" processes need to release the lock... which the > old > semaphore process supported... I confess, I'm spoiled. :) > > Thanks > Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Kevin King > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 2:01 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Inter-Process Control... > > Tom, can you elaborate when you say "the only process that can modify > the > lock is the one that set it". Isn't that exactly how a semaphore is > supposed to work? Both processes should be able to set the lock but > only > one can have it at any moment in time. Or am I missing the point? > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
