🚀 go-pugleaf

"Daniel Stevenson" <daniel@ocreage.com.au> wrote in message
news:42c49259@newsgroups.borland.com...

> Pappa has to wait until Bubba.exe has finished executing before
> continuing so I have used SendMessage() to tell Papa.exe when
> it is finished.

An easier, and more reliable, way is to use WaitForSingleObject() instead.
CreateProcess() returns the HANDLE for the newly spawned process.  You can
pass that HANDLE to WaitForSingleObject(), which will not return until the
process has terminated.

> This all works fine, my problem is that Papa.exe has to execute Bubba.exe
> two times.  After the first exeution Papa.exe receives the message from
> Bubba.exe to say it has finished, so Papa.exe then executes bubba.exe a
> second time with it's new parameters.

Using WaitForSingleObject() will simplify that by not using any messages at
all, as well as streamlining your code.

> Bubba then performs its duties again but when it sends it's finish message
> using SendMessage(), Papa.exe doesn't see the message.
<snip>
>Can anyone see why I wouldn't be seeing the second SendMessage()?

No, because you did not show any of Papa's code that is executing Bubba.


Gambit