alternative thread sleep without CLR

Question

4.67/5 (3 votes)

See more:

I wrote multi-threaded Excel C API code in Excel 2003 (before official multi-threading support) that puts a thread to sleep while it waits for jobs to be added whenever the thread is not busy. However, I seem to get a memory error when I put the thread to sleep with the following code

C++

boost::this_thread::sleep(boost::posix_time::milliseconds(100))

Is there a good alternative that I can utilize that won't utilize the CPU like an infinite loop would?

Note that I cannot utilize CLR directly in my add-in due to incompatibility issues. I could however reference a CLR dll, but I would prefer not to. I've found mixing CLR and BOOST sometimes leaks memory.

Posted 14-Jun-11 3:08am

T2102

Updated 14-Jun-11 3:12am

v2

Add a Solution

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Albert Holguin · Accepted Answer · 2011-06-14T03:23:00

Solution 1

WaitForSingleObject() could be a viable alternative, or Sleep() that is in the WinAPI.

Posted 14-Jun-11 3:23am

Albert Holguin

Comments

T2102 14-Jun-11 9:33am

Thanks, that did the trick

Albert Holguin 14-Jun-11 9:34am

no prob :)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 14-Jun-11 11:23am

Sure, a 5.
--SA