Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Tue, 7 Aug 2001 12:39:05 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Signal handling in tight loops
Message-ID:	<20010807123905.B28476@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<3B6FCBC5 DOT 720C9785 AT paradise DOT net DOT nz>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<3B6FCBC5.720C9785@paradise.net.nz>; from ejrh@paradise.net.nz on Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 11:06:45PM +1200

On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 11:06:45PM +1200, Edmund Horner wrote:
>Hello again.
>
>>From my DJGPP days I remember that the alarm signal could not be raised
>in very tight loops, because signals were only checked when memory was
>accessed.  Does this apply to cygwin, by any chance?
>
>The reason I'm asking is that I have a module in my program which I
>can't completely trust, and I'd like to terminate it after 2 minutes if
>it hasn't returned by then.  I'm hoping to use alarm() for this.
>
>Feasible?

Why don't you write a simple test case?

This technique should be much more useful than inviting random opinions from
a mailing list and it should be MUCH faster.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -