Wolfgang-R3f-

Things can exists and neverless not be so usual, or standard. My knowledge in warfare is limited and i expect people to counter-say my words. Don't worry, i take things very easy ;), i want to learn...

"Am I the only one who disliked the futuristic approach?" My opinion... Yes, i agree : i would like réalistics and usual weaponry. No prototypes, or futuristic véhicules...

i talk about that to the team... thx for repporting this mistake... stay tuned.

i was thinking about simplifying things... waitUntil seems to be not interruptible and may change things a lot... i'll look at your code with care... thx.

Here is a peace of code, and test. I think the code is working properly, i need test now. Enjoy. the test: Spawning 100 thread trying to read and write a global variable at the same time. the critical section code: Lamport's bakery algorithm in sqf script. Feel free to try and repport any bug. ---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 PM ---------- With Critical Section: "CRITICAL" "[18] ENTER" "[18] (0 -> 1)" "[18] LEAVE" "[49] ENTER" "[49] (1 -> 2)" "[49] LEAVE" "[48] ENTER" "[48] (2 -> 3)" "[48] LEAVE" "[50] ENTER" "[50] (3 -> 4)" "[50] LEAVE" "[0] ENTER" "[0] (4 -> 5)" "[0] LEAVE" "[47] ENTER" "[47] (5 -> 6)" "[47] LEAVE" "[99] ENTER" "[99] (6 -> 7)" "[99] LEAVE" "[1] ENTER" "[1] (7 -> 8)" "[1] LEAVE" "[98] ENTER" "[98] (8 -> 9)" "[98] LEAVE" "[96] ENTER" "[96] (9 -> 10)" "[96] LEAVE" Without Critical Section: "[19] (0 -> 1)" "[49] (0 -> 1)" "[50] (1 -> 2)" "[1] (0 -> 1)" "[2] (0 -> 1)" "[3] (0 -> 1)" "[4] (0 -> 1)" "[5] (0 -> 1)" "[6] (0 -> 1)" "[7] (0 -> 1)" "[8] (0 -> 1)" "[9] (0 -> 1)" "[10] (0 -> 1)" "[11] (0 -> 1)" "[12] (0 -> 1)" "[13] (0 -> 1)" "[14] (0 -> 1)" "[15] (0 -> 1)" "[16] (0 -> 1)" "[17] (0 -> 1)" "[18] (0 -> 1)" "[19] (1 -> 2)" "[20] (1 -> 2)" "[21] (1 -> 2)" "[22] (1 -> 2)" "[23] (1 -> 2)" "[24] (1 -> 2)" "[25] (1 -> 2)" "[26] (1 -> 2)" "[27] (1 -> 2)" "[28] (1 -> 2)" "[29] (1 -> 2)" "[30] (1 -> 2)" "[31] (1 -> 2)"

Hello, First apologies for starting a new thread, but i really did not find any clear answers about multithread programming in scripts... dispite i found the questions... Is there anywhere any sample of sqf script (for ArmaII Op Arrowhead) that would ensure atomicity in a chunck of code ? Thank's for yours answers.

okay :), i'll be available for any additionnal test if needed. Great Thank.

some news ? any tips ? thx !

Here is the full content of be.log after trying another random server. May this help more... Have you got any idea about the trouble ? Bad files on my computer ? (arma1 still installed..., win vista 64 bit with uac...) Or bad Network configuration ? i don't think so... DHCP, and port redirection done correctly i think... Conflict with another program ? how may i test this ? I've read that battleye would auto-update itself, did i ? Before trying with the BEv1.141, i retry with the old version to see if an auto-update was done... there wasn't so i put the new dll at the good place...

Thank's for support Battleye-Guy! I get back to you asap! EDIT: here is my be.log with battleye v1.141.

Another BE.log... it seems to be different. Because of Firewall desactivated now on my computer ?

Thank you!

Thank you for help !

Hello, I've looked for a solution to my problem for 2 month almost now... I have the "client not responding" problem too. I've downloaded the new dll from BattlEye site : the version number at battleye initialization is indeed 1.140. BattlEye Client Initialized (v1.140) #beclient test BattlEye Client: Test Enabled #beclient guid BattlEye Client: My GUID: no guid ? Config: Windows Vista. (arma game re-installed, patch too, dll downloaded), fraps running, g13 running, track ir running, UAC not desactivated, router configured enough to allow me to play without battleye, DHCP at home...), no BE.log output, arma2 launched in administrator, firewall on (with permission for arma2.exe). I'm the only one of my team having this problem... huhuhu :(... thank...