DN> I've received the scoop from IBM and have the basic semaphore
 DN> interface working on my test-bed programs here. I wasn't able to use
 DN> QBASIC very readily, since CALL ABSOLUTE stinks.

        Do you think it is possible CALL ABSOLUTE works better under PBasic?

 DN> As a result my test
 DN> code is in C, compiled using Borland 3.1 and Watcom 10.6. The Borland
 DN> compiler often generates some bad object code when manipulating the
 DN> 32-bit semaphore handles, so I am currently sticking with the 16-bit
 DN> Watcom compiler for testing.

        OK.  This shouldn't really matter.

 DN> I'll send you the assembler source for the subroutine library, C
 DN> source for the sample DOS program to be activated, and C source [unless
 DN> you'd prefer PL/I] for an OS/2 program to build the semaphore and then
 DN> activate the DOS program.

        When you say "activate", you mean just pass the
semaphore, right?  The OS/2 code shouldn't be spawning a child process.

 DN> You should be able to place the semaphore
 DN> requests anywhere you need them in your Power BASIC code, since the
 DN> assembler subroutines are coded using the Pascal linkage convention,
 DN> which is prettty much the lowest common denominator of such things; you
 DN> can even in-line the assembler code, I suppose.

        'Should be pretty trivial.

 DN> At the OS/2 end, the
 DN> semaphore API calls can replace the named pipe API calls, more or less,
 DN> in the earlier OS/2 program.

        SOP.

 DN> I should be done by this weekend, so check your Internet mailbox early
 DN> next week.

        Will do, and thanks a million.

                                                        Les

e-mail: lrhorer{at}fibrcom.com

--- EZPoint V2.2