Search Results

Search found 8588 results on 344 pages for 'thread abort'.

Page 21/344 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

• multiple move operations and data processes in work thread

  - by younevertell

  main thread-- start workthread--StartStage(get list of positions for data process) -- move to one position -- data sampling*strong text*-- data collection--data analysis------data sampling*strong text* basically, work thread does the data sampling*strong text*-- data collection--data analysis------data sampling*strong text* loop for one positioin until press stop or target is obtained. my questions: After work thread finishs the loop for one positioin, it would end itself. now how to make the work thread moves to the next position to do the data process loop after work thread finish one position work, would not end itself until data process for all the positions are done? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• how to call windows paint event from child thread

  - by RAJ K

  If I am wrong then please correct me as I am new in this. I have one thread which display image captured from webcam on a windows created using CreateWindowEx() function. Now when i execute my program I can see that my paint code (in WindowProc()) in never reached (called InvalidateRect() from child thread to redraw), checked using breakpoint. Actually frame capture and display is being done in thread and I think because its in child thread and Window is in Main thread that is why its not able to call paint event. Can you help me on this

  Read the article

• android thread management onPause

  - by Kwan Cheng

  I have a class that extends the Thread class and has its run method implemented as so. public void run(){ while(!terminate){ if(paused){ Thread.yield(); }else{ accummulator++; } } } This thread is spawned from the onCreate method. When my UI is hidden (when the Home key is pressed) my onPause method will set the paused flag to true and yield the tread. However in the DDMS I still see the uTime of the thread accumulate and its state as "running". So my question is. What is the proper way to stop the thread so that it does not use up CPU time?

  Read the article

• Problem in creating another thread

  - by Avinash

  Hi, I am using NSThread to create different thread and displaying images in my application on a new thread instead of main thread. On main thread i am working with a table view which is displaying data from XML file, In the same view I am displaying images below. But, displaying images on new thread is not working properly. Did i made any mistake in creating Here below is my code. Please help me its urgent. Thanks in advance...................... - (void)viewDidLoad { [super viewDidLoad]; [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(startTheBackgroundJob) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; } - (void)startTheBackgroundJob { NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init]; currentLocationImageView = [[UIImageView alloc] init]; NSArray *images = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:img1, img2, nil]; [currentLocationImageView setAnimationImages:images]; [currentLocationImageView setAnimationRepeatCount:0]; [currentLocationImageView setAnimationDuration:5.0]; [self.view addSubview:currentLocationImageView]; [pool release]; }

  Read the article

• Thread Code...anything wrong with this, must use java 1.4

  - by bmw0128

  I have a servlet automatically firing up when the app server starts, and in its init(), I'm making another thread: init(){ new FooThread() } in FooThread(), i want to periodically check the status of a DB value, then depending on the value, make a web service call. When these two tasks complete, I want the thread to sleep to wait a certain period then repeat. This cycle would just continue forever. FooThread: public class FooThread implements Runnable{ Thread t; FooThread(){ t = new Thread(this, "BBSThread"); logger.info("*** about to start " + t.getName()); t.start(); logger.info("*** started: " + t); } public void run() { try{ while(true){ //do the db check, then conditionally do the web services call logger.info("*** calling sleep() ***"); Thread.sleep(50000); logger.info("*** now awake ***"); } } catch (InterruptedException e) { System.out.println("*** FooThread interrupted"); } } }

  Read the article

• When should ThreadLocal be used instead of Thread.SetData/Thread.GetData?

  - by Jon Ediger

  Prior to .net 4.0, I implemented a solution using named data slots in System.Threading.Thread. Now, in .net 4.0, there is the idea of ThreadLocal. How does ThreadLocal usage compare to named data slots? Does the ThreadLocal value get inherited by children threads? Is the idea that ThreadLocal is a simplified version of using named data slots? An example of some stuff using named data slots follows. Could this be simplified through use of ThreadLocal, and would it retain the same properties as the named data slots? public static void SetSliceName(string slice) { System.Threading.Thread.SetData(System.Threading.Thread.GetNamedDataSlot(SliceVariable), slice); } public static string GetSliceName(bool errorIfNotFound) { var slice = System.Threading.Thread.GetData(System.Threading.Thread.GetNamedDataSlot(SliceVariable)) as string; if (errorIfNotFound && string.IsNullOrEmpty(slice)) {throw new ConfigurationErrorsException("Server slice name not configured.");} return slice; }

  Read the article

• New form on a different thread

  - by Dan

  So I have a thread in my application, which purpose is to listen to messages from the server and act according to what it recieves. I ran into a problem when I wanted to fire off a message from the server, that when the client app recieves it, the client app would open up a new form. However this new form just freezes instantly. I think what's happening is that the new form is loaded up on the same thread as the thread listening to the server, which of course is busy listening on the stream, in turn blocking the thread. Normally, for my other functions in the clients listening thread, I'd use invokes to update the UI of the main form, so I guess what I'm asking for is if here's a way to invoke a new form on the main form.

  Read the article

• passing variables when calling methon in new thread (iphone)

  - by Mouhamad Lamaa

  dear stacks i need to pass variables to the thread method when creating a new thread my code is the follwing //generating thread [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(startThread) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; thread job - (void)startThread:(NSInteger *)var img:(UIImageView *) Img{ NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init]; [NSThread sleepForTimeInterval:var]; [self performSelectorOnMainThread:@selector(threadMethod) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:NO]; //i need to pass Img to threadMethod: [pool release]; } thread Method - (void)threadMethod:(UIImageView *) Img { //do some coding. } so how i can do this (pass parameter to both of methods

  Read the article

• java -> System.gc(); Does this call opens a new Thread or not?

  - by ogzylz

  For example I such a code ... get some memory and lose all the pointers to that memory so that System.gc(); can collect it. call System.gc(); do some other tasks; Here does the "do some other tasks;" and "System.gc();" works in paralel or does the "do some other tasks;" waits for "System.gc();" to be executed Thank you

  Read the article

• Multi-threading does not work correctly using std::thread (C++ 11)

  - by user1364743

  I coded a small c++ program to try to understand how multi-threading works using std::thread. Here's the step of my program execution : Initialization of a 5x5 matrix of integers with a unique value '42' contained in the class 'Toto' (initialized in the main). I print the initialized 5x5 matrix. Declaration of std::vector of 5 threads. I attach all threads respectively with their task (threadTask method). Each thread will manipulate a std::vector<int> instance. I join all threads. I print the new state of my 5x5 matrix. Here's the output : 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 It should be : 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 Here's the code sample : #include <iostream> #include <vector> #include <thread> class Toto { public: /* ** Initialize a 5x5 matrix with the 42 value. */ void initData(void) { for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++) { std::vector<int> vec; for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) { vec.push_back(42); } this->m_data.push_back(vec); } } /* ** Display the whole matrix. */ void printData(void) const { for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++) { for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) { printf("%d ", this->m_data[y][x]); } printf("\n"); } printf("\n"); } /* ** Function attached to the thread (thread task). ** Replace the original '42' value by another one. */ void threadTask(std::vector<int> &list, int value) { for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) { list[x] = value; } } /* ** Return the m_data instance propertie. */ std::vector<std::vector<int> > &getData(void) { return (this->m_data); } private: std::vector<std::vector<int> > m_data; }; int main(void) { Toto toto; toto.initData(); toto.printData(); //Display the original 5x5 matrix (first display). std::vector<std::thread> threadList(5); //Initialization of vector of 5 threads. for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { //Threads initializationss std::vector<int> vec = toto.getData()[i]; //Get each sub-vectors. threadList.at(i) = std::thread(&Toto::threadTask, toto, vec, i); //Each thread will be attached to a specific vector. } for (int j = 0; j < 5; j++) { threadList.at(j).join(); } toto.printData(); //Second display. getchar(); return (0); } However, in the method threadTask, if I print the variable list[x], the output is correct. I think I can't print the correct data in the main because the printData() call is in the main thread and the display in the threadTask function is correct because the method is executed in its own thread (not the main one). It's strange, it means that all threads created in a parent processes can't modified the data in this parent processes ? I think I forget something in my code. I'm really lost. Does anyone can help me, please ? Thank a lot in advance for your help.

  Read the article

• Setting minimum threads in thread pool

  - by expert

  I have an application with 4 worker threads from the thread pool. It was waking up every 0.5 second. as written in msdn the thread pool monitors every 0,5 second to create idle threads. I set the nuber of minimum threads to 4 and it solved the problem - no more background activity all the time. My question is - I have another applicatiopn which has the same number of threads threads-4, but here setting min thread to 4 doesn't help but when setting min thread to 5 then the background monitoring stops. What might be the difference between 2 application with the same number of threads from the thread pool- 4 threads.On one setting min threads to 4 helps and the other only setting min threads to 5 helps?

  Read the article

• Core Data managed object context thread synchronisation

  - by Ben Reeves

  I'm have an issue where i'm updating a many-to-many relationship in a background thread, which works fine in that threa, but when I send the object back to the main thread the changes do not show. If I close the app and reopen the data is saved fine and the changes show on the main thread. Also using [context lock] instead of a different managed object context works fine. I have tried NSManagedObjectContext: - (BOOL)save:(NSError **)error; - (void)refreshObject:(NSManagedObject *)object mergeChanges:(BOOL)flag; at different stages throughout the process but it doesn't seem to help. My core data code uses the following getter to ensure any operations are thread safe: - (NSManagedObjectContext *) managedObjectContext { NSThread * thisThread = [NSThread currentThread]; if (thisThread == [NSThread mainThread]) { //Main thread just return default context return managedObjectContext; } else { //Thread safe trickery NSManagedObjectContext * threadManagedObjectContext = [[thisThread threadDictionary] objectForKey:CONTEXT_KEY]; if (threadManagedObjectContext == nil) { threadManagedObjectContext = [[[NSManagedObjectContext alloc] init] autorelease]; [threadManagedObjectContext setPersistentStoreCoordinator: [self persistentStoreCoordinator]]; [[thisThread threadDictionary] setObject:threadManagedObjectContext forKey:CONTEXT_KEY]; } return threadManagedObjectContext; } } and when I pass object between threads i'm using -(NSManagedObject*)makeSafe:(NSManagedObject*)object { if ([object managedObjectContext] != [self managedObjectContext]) { NSError * error = nil; object = [[self managedObjectContext] existingObjectWithID:[object objectID] error:&error]; if (error) { NSLog(@"Error makeSafe: %@", error); } } return object; } Any help appreciated

  Read the article

• WPF Background Thread Invocation

  - by jeffn825

  Maybe I'm mis-remembering how Winforms works or I'm overcomplicating the hell out of this, but here's my problem. I have a WPF client app application that talks to a server over WCF. The current user may "log out" of the WPF client, which closes all open screens, leaves only the navigation pane, and minimizes the program window. When the user re-maximizes the program window, they are prompted to log in. Simple. But sometimes things happen on background threads - like every 5 minutes the client tries to make a WCF calls that refreshes some cached data. And what if the user is logged out when this 5 minute timer triggers? Well, then the user should be prompted to log back in...and this must of course happen on the UI thread. private static ISecurityContext securityContext; public static ISecurityContext SecurityContext { get { if (securityContext == null) { // Login method shows a window and prompts the user to log in Application.Current.Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)Login); } return securityContext; } } So far so good, right? But what happens when multiple threads hit this spot of code? Well, my first intuition was that since I'm syncrhonizing across the Application.Current.Dispatcher, I should be fine, and whichever thread hit first would be responsible for showing the login form and getting the user logged in... Not the case... Thread 1 will hit the code and call ShowDialog on the login form Thread 2 will also hit the code and will call Login as soon as Thread 1 has called ShowDialog, since calling ShowDialog unblocked Thread 1 (I believe because of the way the WPF message pump works) All I want is a synchronized way of getting the user logged back into the application...what am I missing here? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Moving delegate-related function to a different thread

  - by Chris

  Hello everybody. We are developing a library in C# that communicates with the serial port. We have a function that is given to a delegate. The problem is that we want it to be run in a different thread. We tried creating a new thread (called DatafromBot) but keep using it as follows (first line): comPort.DataReceived += new SerialDataReceivedEventHandler(comPort_DataReceived); DatafromBot = new Thread(comPort_DataReceived); DatafromBot.Start(); comPort_DataReceived is defined as: Thread DatafromBot; public void comPort_DataReceived(object sender, SerialDataReceivedEventArgs e) { ... } The following errors occur: Error 3 The best overloaded method match for 'System.Threading.Thread.Thread(System.Threading.ThreadStart)' has some invalid arguments C:...\IR52cLow\CommunicationManager.cs 180 27 IR52cLow Error 4 Argument '1': cannot convert from 'method group' to 'System.Threading.ThreadStart' C:...\IR52cLow\CommunicationManager.cs 180 38 IR52cLow Any ideas of how we should convert this to get it to compile? Please note that comPort.DataReceived (pay attention to "." instead of "_") lies within a system library and cannot be modified. Thanks for your time! Chris

  Read the article

• Is NSPasteboard thread-safe?

  - by Joe

  Is it safe to write data to an NSPasteboard object from a background thread? I can't seem to find a definitive answer anywhere. I think the assumption is that the data will be written to the pasteboard before the drag begins. Background: I have an application that is fetching data from Evernote. When the application first loads, it gets the meta data for each note, but not the note content. The note stubs are then listed in an outline view. When the user starts to drag a note, the notes are passed to the background thread that handles getting the note content from Evernote. Having the main thread block until the data is gotten results in a significant delay and a poor user experience, so I have the [outlineView:writeItems:toPasteboard:] function return YES while the background thread processes the data and invokes the main thread to write the data to the pasteboard object. If the note content gets transferred before the user drops the note somewhere, everything works perfectly. If the user drops the note somewhere before the data has been processed... well, everything blocks forever. Is it safe to just have the background thread write the data to the pasteboard?

  Read the article

• Static variables and long running thread on IIS 7.5

  - by Dmitry

  Hello people. Help me solve next problem. I have ASP .NET MVC2 application. I run it on IIS 7.5. In one page user clicks button and handler for this button sends request to server (jquery.ajax). At server action in controller starts new thread (it makes long time import): var thread = new Thread(RefreshCitiesInDatabase); thread.Start(); State of import is available in static variable. New thread changes value of variable in the begin of work. User can check state of import too with the help of this variable, which is used in view. And user sees import's state. When I start this function few minutes everything is okey. On page I see right state of import, quantity of imported records is changed, I see changes in logs. But after few minutes begin troubles. When I refresh page with import state sometimes I see that import is okey but sometimes I see page with default values about import (like application is just started), but after that again I can see page with normal import's state. I tried to attach Visual Studio to IIS process and debug application. But when request comes to controller sometimes static variables have right values and sometimes they have default values (static int has 0, static string has "" etc.). Tell me what I do wrong. May be I must start additional thread in other way? Thanks in advance, Dmitry

  Read the article

• How to know if all the Thread Pool's thread are already done with its tasks?

  - by mcxiand

  I have this application that will recurse all folders in a given directory and look for PDF. If a PDF file is found, the application will count its pages using ITextSharp. I did this by using a thread to recursively scan all the folders for pdf, then if then PDF is found, this will be queued to the thread pool. The code looks like this: //spawn a thread to handle the processing of pdf on each folder. var th = new Thread(() => { pdfDirectories = Directory.GetDirectories(pdfPath); processDir(pdfDirectories); }); th.Start(); private void processDir(string[] dirs) { foreach (var dir in dirs) { pdfFiles = Directory.GetFiles(dir, "*.pdf"); processFiles(pdfFiles); string[] newdir = Directory.GetDirectories(dir); processDir(newdir); } } private void processFiles(string[] files) { foreach (var pdf in files) { ThreadPoolHelper.QueueUserWorkItem( new { path = pdf }, (data) => { processPDF(data.path); } ); } } My problem is, how do i know that the thread pool's thread has finished processing all the queued items so i can tell the user that the application is done with its intended task?

  Read the article

• c++ multithread

  - by chnet

  I use c++ to implement a thread class. The code is in the following. I initialize two objects, wish it will start two threads (I use pthread_self() to look the thread Id). But the result shows that there is only one thread beside the main thread. I am a bit confused... class Thread { public: int mask; pthread_t thread; Thread( int ); void start(); static void * EntryPoint (void *); void Run(); }; Thread::Thread( int a) { mask =a; } void Thread::Run() { cout<<"thread begin to run" <<endl; cout <<" Thread Id is: "<< pthread_self() << endl; // the same thread Id. } void * Thread::EntryPoint(void * pthis) { cout << "entry" <<endl; Thread *pt = (Thread *) pthis; pt->Run(); } void Thread::start() { pthread_create(&thread, NULL, EntryPoint, (void *)ThreadId ); pthread_join(thread, NULL); } int main() { int input_array[8]={3,1,2,5,6,8,7,4}; Thread t1(1); Thread t2(2); t1.start(); t2.start() }

  Read the article

• c++ multithread

  - by chnet

  I use C++ to implement a thread class. My code shows in the following. I have a problem about how to access thread data. In the class Thread, I create a thread use pthread_create() function. then it calls EntryPoint() function to start thread created. In the Run function, I want to access the mask variable, it always shows segment fault. So, my question is whether the new created thread copy the data in original class? How to access the thread own data? class Thread { public: int mask; pthread_t thread; Thread( int ); void start(); static void * EntryPoint (void *); void Run(); }; Thread::Thread( int a) { mask =a; } void Thread::Run() { cout<<"thread begin to run" <<endl; cout << mask <<endl; // it always show segmentfault here } void * Thread::EntryPoint(void * pthis) { cout << "entry" <<endl; Thread *pt = (Thread *) pthis; pt->Run(); } void Thread::start() { pthread_create(&thread, NULL, EntryPoint, (void *)ThreadId ); pthread_join(thread, NULL); } int main() { int input_array[8]={3,1,2,5,6,8,7,4}; Thread t1(1); t1.start(); }

  Read the article

• Disposing ActiveX resources owned by another thread

  - by Stefan Teitge

  I've got a problem problem with threading and disposing resources. I've got a C# Windows Forms application which runs expensive operation in a thread. This thread instantiates an ActiveX control (AxControl). This control must be disposed as it uses a high amount of memory. So I implemented a Dispose() method and even a destructor. After the thread ends the destructor is called. This is sadly called by the UI thread. So invoking activexControl.Dispose(); fails with the message "COM object that has been separated from its underlying RCW", as the object belongs to another thread. How to do this correctly or is it just a bad design I use? (I stripped the code down to the minimum including removing any safety concerns.) class Program { [STAThread] static void Main() { // do stuff here, e.g. open a form new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunStuff); // do more stuff } private void RunStuff() { DoStuff stuff = new DoStuff(); stuff.PerformStuff(); } } class DoStuff : IDisposable { private AxControl activexControl; DoStuff() { activexControl = new AxControl(); activexControl.CreateControl(); // force instance } ~DoStuff() { Dispose(); } public void Dispose() { activexControl.Dispose(); } public void PerformStuff() { // invent perpetuum mobile here, takes time } }

  Read the article

• Determine if the current thread has low I/O priority

  - by Magnus Hoff

  I have a background thread that does some I/O-intensive background type work. To please the other threads and processes running, I set the thread priority to "background mode" using SetThreadPriority, like this: SetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), THREAD_MODE_BACKGROUND_BEGIN); However, THREAD_MODE_BACKGROUND_BEGIN is only available in Windows Server 2008 or newer, as well as Windows Vista and newer, but the program needs to work well on Windows Server 2003 and XP as well. So the real code is more like this: if (!SetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), THREAD_MODE_BACKGROUND_BEGIN)) { SetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), THREAD_PRIORITY_LOWEST); } The problem with this is that on Windows XP it will totally disrupt the system by using too much I/O. I have a plan for a ugly and shameful way of mitigating this problem, but that depends on me being able to determine if the current thread has low I/O priority or not. Now, I know I can store which thread priority I ended up setting, but the control flow in the program is not really well suited for this. I would rather like to be able to test later whether or not the current thread has low I/O priority -- if it is in "background mode". GetThreadPriority does not seem to give me this information. Is there any way to determine if the current thread has low I/O priority?

  Read the article

• Why do InterruptedExceptions clear a thread's interrupted status?

  - by Hanno Fietz

  If a thread is interrupted while inside Object.wait() or Thread.join(), it throws an InterruptedException, which resets the thread's interrupted status. I. e., if I have a loop like this inside a Runnable.run(): while (!this._workerThread.isInterrupted()) { // do something try { synchronized (this) { this.wait(this._waitPeriod); } } catch (InterruptedException e) { if (!this._isStopping()) { this._handleFault(e); } } } the thread will continue to run after calling interrupt(). This means I have to explicitly break out of the loop by checking for my own stop flag in the loop condition, rethrow the exception, or add a break. Now, this is not exactly a problem, since this behaviour is well documented and doesn't prevent me from doing anything the way I want. However, I don't seem to understand the concept behind it: Why is a thread not considered interrupted anymore once the exception has been thrown? A similar behaviour also occurs if you get the interrupted status with interrupted() instead of isInterrupted(), then, too, the thread will only appear interrupted once. Am I doing something unusual here? For example, is it more common to catch the InterruptedException outside the loop? (Even though I'm not exactly a beginner, I tagged this "beginner", because it seems like a very basic question to me, looking at it.)

  Read the article

• how to call the method in thread with aruguments and return some value

  - by ratty

  i like to call the method in thread with aruguments and return some value here example class Program { static void Main() { Stopwatch stop = new Stopwatch(); stop.Start(); Thread FirstThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Fun1)); Thread SecondThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Fun2)); FirstThread.Start(); SecondThread.Start(); } public static void Fun1() { for (int i = 1; i <= 1000; i++) { Console.WriteLine("Fun1 writes:{0}", i); } } public static void Fun2() { for (int i = 1000; i >= 6; i--) { Console.WriteLine("Fun2 writes:{0}", i); } } } i know this above example run successfully but if method fun1 like this public int fun1(int i) { for (int n = i; n >= i+10; n++) { Console.WriteLine("Fun2 writes:{0}", i); } } then how can i call this in thread. Is it possible .Any body Help for me

  Read the article

• Call event from original thread ??

  - by user311883

  Hi all, Here is my problem, I have a class which have a object who throw an event and in this event I throw a custom event from my class. But unfortunately the original object throw the event from another thread and so my event is also throw on another thread. This cause a exception when my custom event try to access from controls. Here is a code sample to better understand : class MyClass { // Original object private OriginalObject myObject; // My event public delegate void StatsUpdatedDelegate(object sender, StatsArgs args); public event StatsUpdatedDelegate StatsUpdated; public MyClass() { // Original object event myObject.AnEvent += new EventHandler(myObject_AnEvent); } // This event is called on another thread private void myObject_AnEvent(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Throw my custom event here StatsArgs args = new StatsArgs(..........); StatsUpdated(this, args); } } So when on my windows form I call try to update a control from the event StatsUpdated I get a cross thread exception cause it has been called on another thread. What I want to do is throw my custom event on the original class thread, so control can be used within it. Anyone can help me ?

  Read the article

• How to end a thread in perl

  - by user1672190

  I am new to perl and i have a question about perl thread. I am trying to create a new thread to check if the running function is timed out, and my way of doing it is as below. Logic is 1.create a new thread 2.run the main function and see if it is timed out, if ture, kill it Sample code: $exit_tread = false; # a flag to make sure timeout thread will run my $thr_timeout = threads->new( \&timeout ); execute main function here; $exit_thread = true # set the flag to true to force thread ends $thr_timeout->join(); #wait for the timeout thread ends Code of timeout function sub timeout { $timeout = false; my $start_time = time(); while (!$exit_thread) { sleep(1); last if (main function is executed); if (time() - $start_time >= configured time ) { logmsg "process is killed as request timed out"; _kill_remote_process(); $timeout = true; last; } } } now the code is running as i expected, but i am just not very clear if the code $exit_thread = true works because there is a "last" at the end of while loop. Can anybody give me a answer? Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >