[Pwn]

I'm reading this tutorial on multi-threading on MSDN, and it was written in 1993, and keeps referring to NT. I know XP and Vista are NT based OSes, but there's allusions that NT, as in the original NT, is the only version that some of the functions will be valid on, as if to say in XP things will change. Specifically, it's talking about the WaitForxxx family: WaitForInputIdle, SleepEx, WaitForSingleObjectEx, and WaitForMultipleObjectsEx.

To quote the tutorial, the following is said:

"(By the way, asynchronous I/O processing will not be part of other implementations of the Win32 API because it requires a particular I/O model that at this point is implemented only under Windows NT.)"

This leads me to believe that things were expected to change in later releases of the Windows OS. Could I get some input from someone who knows this subject more concretely?

EDIT: The above link may or may not work; when I click it, it tries to open the page in my intranet space, so that must be my local copy of my MSDN library.

This post has been edited by Pwn: 21 March 2009 - 11:57 PM

[Hyper]

The Windows family tree stays backwards compatible (to an extent).
Yes multi-threading works on Windows XP/Vista.

[no2pencil]

Quote

keeps referring to NT

At the boot/splash screen for Windows 2000 it says "Built on NT Technology".

& NT stands for New Technology.

So it was build on New Technology Technology.

[Pwn]

It seems you misunderstood my question...so let me spell out my question in simpler terms. Are the functions mentioned above still used in later versions of the NT OS (yes, I know NT, 2K, XP, and Vista are built on the NT technology, and I stated that in my OP).

Have these functions been changed since NT came out and/or been deprecated?

Do any of you still use these functions for multithreading?

I hope that clears up my question some.

I don't mean to sound snotty or anything, I'm just trying to guage if I need to be reading something else or if this tutorial still holds some value before I spend too much time trying to comprehend it only to find out it doesn't work.

This post has been edited by Pwn: 22 March 2009 - 12:42 AM

[Hyper]

I prefer the 16-bit versions of functions over the 32-bit versions (over the 64-bit because I can't use those).

[Pwn]

That sounds costly in a 32 bit world and soon to be 64 bit.

[Hyper]

Those who choose to use the 64-bit systems and M$ OS, can. I'll make my own path.