> >Hmm. Depending on how often we need to poll (meaning how
> often we need
> >to deliver signals), perhaps we can go with the WFSOEx
> method anyway.
> >The code would be slightly easier: I've attached a version that uses
> >this one instead.
> >
> >(You'd probably move the WaitFor()... call into the #define as well)
> >
> >Looking at this code, I'm thinking we can probably do away with the
> >critical section alltogether. All that code now executes on the main
> >thread. Does this seem correct?
> >
> >
> >
>
> I understood your first version better than I understand this
> one. What
> calls __pg_poll_signals()? As I understand the first version, we
> wouldn't need to put any polling calls into the main thread
> code - the
> signal detector would just queue a call to pg_signal_apc() on
> the main
> thread as needed, which would in turn do some cleanup and call the
> signal handler. That seems to me to be *very* clean and nice. Am I
> missing something? (As you can no doubt tell, IANAWP :-) )
No, we need to poll from the main thread. In the first code, with a
check of the counter. In the second code with calls to
WaitForSingleObjectEx(). Otherwise, the APCs won't get delivered.
//Magnus
