Mike Hearn wrote:
You're right, good catch. I'm not sure it's worth resending the patch
though as really hardly any of our COM implementation is thread safe at
all.
Please don't make assertions like this. If you make people believe that
"code X has fault Y" without specifying exactly where the p
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:28:20 +0200, Jeroen Janssen wrote:
> What exactly does this mean? (the impact on running programs that make
> use of COM)
Applications that aggressively use multithreading with our DCOM code will
crash or suffer intermittent errors. Fortunately InstallShield doesn't.
I'm a
Mike Hearn wrote:
You're right, good catch. I'm not sure it's worth resending the patch
though as really hardly any of our COM implementation is thread safe at
all.
What exactly does this mean? (the impact on running programs that make
use of COM)
---
Jeroen Janssen
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:29:01 +0200, Jeroen Janssen wrote:
>> + res = IRpcStubBuffer_Release(stub);
>
> I'm not sure but, is there a hypothical race condition here when a
> thread switch takes place and someone tries to reuse the stub while
> valid is not set to TRUE yet (but the stub has already
Mike Hearn wrote:
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rob Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Implement StdMarshal::ReleaseMarshalData
+ res = IRpcStubBuffer_Release(stub);
I'm not sure but, is there a hypothical race condition here when a
thread switch takes place and someone tries to reu
