Pedro Alves wrote:
> pgeorges wrote:
>
> At http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms913056.aspx
> it is stated that
> "All threads initially start at THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL (251)."
>
> Currently I use
> CeSetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), priority);
> where priority is between 248 a
pgeorges wrote:
At http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms913056.aspx
it is stated that
"All threads initially start at THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL (251)."
Currently I use
CeSetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), priority);
where priority is between 248 and 254 to run threads in background.
At http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms913056.aspx
it is stated that
"All threads initially start at THREAD_PRIORITY_NORMAL (251)."
Currently I use
CeSetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), priority);
where priority is between 248 and 254 to run threads in background.
If I remember well, thi
Matthew Kille wrote:
> Here's the suggested patch:-
Good thing it's documented:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms834197.aspx
I also needed this for:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-11/msg00218.html
I can confirm it makes a difference :-)
Will commit your patch when I get
