🚀 go-pugleaf

Yes, I use synch methods when an exact value of shared var is needed.
But my question was about checking for zero or not zero only.

"Remy Lebeau (TeamB)" <no.spam@no.spam.com> wrote in message 
news:41ee9aae$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
> "Tumurbaatar S." <nospam_tumur@magicnet.mn> wrote in message
> news:41edea6b@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
>> Is it not matter that I'm not using any synchronization methods?
>
> Yes, it does matter.  Always synchronize accees to any data that is shared
> by multiple threads, especially if one of the threads is altering the 
> data.
> In this particular case, the easiest way to synchronize access to a shared
> integer is to use the Interlocked functions, such as InterlockedExchange 
> and
> InterlockedExchangeAdd():
>
>
>    int my_var = 0;
>
>    --- thread1 ---
>    InterlockedExchange(&my_var, new_value);
>
>
>    --- thread2 ---
>    if( InterlockedExchangeAdd(&my_var, 0) != 0 ) ...
>
>
> Otherwise, use a critical section instead:
>
>    int my_var = 0;
>    CRITICAL_SECTION cs = {0};
>
>    --- program startup ---
>    InitializeCriticalSection(&cs);
>
>    --- program termination ---
>    DeleteCriticalSection(&cs);
>
>    --- thread1 ---
>    EnterCriticalSection(&cs)
>    my_var = new_value;
>    LeaveCriticalSection(&cs)
>
>    --- thread2 ---
>    EnterCriticalSection(&cs);
>    if( my_var != 0 ) ...
>    LeaveCriticalSection(&cs);
>
>
> Gambit
>
>