From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@speakeasy.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Thread Library
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:19:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020206171914.AFECF3F40B@quanstro.net> (raw)
not to defend nt, but i had no problem calling select() from
the wsa library. i did create an include file that mapped the
errors from WSAx to Ey and hid all the include nasties (unix
is even worse than nt in this case). it looked like:
------
#if defined(NT)
#define boolean _fuck_windows_
#include <winsock.h>
#undef boolean
#ifndef EWOULDBLOCK
#define EWOULDBLOCK WSAEWOULDBLOCK
#define EINPROGRESS WSAEINPROGRESS
#define EALREADY WSAEALREADY
#define ENOTSOCK WSAENOTSOCK
#define EDESTADDRREQ WSAEDESTADDRREQ
#define EMSGSIZE WSAEMSGSIZE
#define EPROTOTYPE WSAEPROTOTYPE
#define ENOPROTOOPT WSAENOPROTOOPT
#define EPROTONOSUPPORT WSAEPROTONOSUPPORT
#define ESOCKTNOSUPPORT WSAESOCKTNOSUPPORT
#define EOPNOTSUPP WSAEOPNOTSUPP
#define EPFNOSUPPORT WSAEPFNOSUPPORT
#define EAFNOSUPPORT WSAEAFNOSUPPORT
#define EADDRINUSE WSAEADDRINUSE
#define EADDRNOTAVAIL WSAEADDRNOTAVAIL
#define ENETDOWN WSAENETDOWN
#define ENETUNREACH WSAENETUNREACH
#define ENETRESET WSAENETRESET
#define ECONNABORTED WSAECONNABORTED
#define ECONNRESET WSAECONNRESET
#define ENOBUFS WSAENOBUFS
#define EISCONN WSAEISCONN
#define ENOTCONN WSAENOTCONN
#define ESHUTDOWN WSAESHUTDOWN
#define ETOOMANYREFS WSAETOOMANYREFS
#define ETIMEDOUT WSAETIMEDOUT
#define ECONNREFUSED WSAECONNREFUSED
#define ELOOP WSAELOOP
#define EHOSTDOWN WSAEHOSTDOWN
#define EHOSTUNREACH WSAEHOSTUNREACH
#define EPROCLIM WSAEPROCLIM
#define EUSERS WSAEUSERS
#define EDQUOT WSAEDQUOT
#define ESTALE WSAESTALE
#define EREMOTE WSAEREMOTE
#endif
#else
#include <netdb.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <netinet/in.h>
#include <arpa/inet.h>
#endif
----------
Russ Cox wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, you can't implement threadkill
> completely on NT since I don't see how to send an interrupt to
> another process.
I'm pretty sure you can't. The best you can do is send it a message
to _persuade_ it to pack it in. My theory is that the program loader,
oops kernel, forcibly kills processes by ripping them out of memory
and throwing away their kernel resources.
The whole model is totally and utterly flawed.
I guess you could have a thread manager thread that receives a
threadkill messages and kills 'em. Such revolting hacks are often
the only way to do it.
Try writing rsh [remote shell] on NT. You can't select [WaitForMultipleObjects
or whatever it's called] on sockets ... It's doable, but revolting.
next reply other threads:[~2002-02-06 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-06 17:19 erik quanstrom [this message]
2002-02-07 10:35 ` Boyd Roberts
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-07 13:45 Russ Cox
2002-02-05 7:38 [9fans] Thread library nigel
2002-02-05 2:31 Russ Cox
2002-02-05 11:31 ` Boyd Roberts
2002-02-05 2:25 Andrew Simmons
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020206171914.AFECF3F40B@quanstro.net \
--to=quanstro@speakeasy.net \
--cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).