in reply to How to pass a object value to global array in threads

why are you insisting while BrowserUK has already given you a very satisfying explanation? It's like you never read his suggestions
  • Comment on Re: How to pass a object value to global array in threads

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: How to pass a object value to global array in threads
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 26, 2015 at 09:09 UTC
    more like OP is turning a blind eye and hoping someone else will confirm his ideas are possible ... an optimitist

      Amazing that the same basic question comes up in the same month!

      I confirm that you can't share a Telnet object between threads. After understanding the responses to my post on the subject, the docs make sense: only scalers and references to scalers can be shared. A Telnet object is neither. It would be really handy if in the future this could be done, but until then... try a Telnet server thread that passes commands, status, and data via a shared common area. I.E. create your own mini API.

      For a simple example see: SDR Scanner(aka Threaded wxPerl Example)

      James

      There's never enough time to do it right, but always enough time to do it over...

Re^2: How to pass a object value to global array in threads
by gjoshi (Sexton) on Oct 26, 2015 at 09:11 UTC

    i did read that explanation couple of times but not tried also same solution but not satisfying my requirement. Not able to understand how to do it. nothing like i am not reading or something like that. believe me i did read and tried that option too.

       but not tried also same solution

      What does that mean? Are you saing you tried the solution but it didn't work? Or are you saying you didn't try the solution?

       but not satisfying my requirement.

      Your requirement is impossible :)

      A square peg cannot fit into a round hole

        sorry it was typo. i mean to say i tried doing that too :). It just that because of legacy code I am unnecessary trying to do this thing.

        "but not tried also same solution" type. sorry. I mean I tried the solution. its our legacy code due to that I am trying to do unnecessary things :). you are right my requirement is weird. I think some things are not possible with certain options.