that gets the lock next is not FIFO
Why do you think it should be FIFO?
I've never heard of a flock-ing order
Any ideas?
write a log viewer, one that doesn't care about the physical order (or disorder) of the entries (log process-ids and thread-ids not just timestamps)
switch to a logging framework that takes care of all this for you
In reply to Re: Win32 - flock() not FIFO?
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Win32 - flock() not FIFO?
by hennesse
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |