Hi,

"Shashank Date" <ADATE / kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:7NE89.43554$mj7.805851 / twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Hi Park,
>
> Thanks again !
>
> This comes very close to what I want since it not only kills the threads
but
> also the "ping" processes which were, in the earlier versions, still
running
> in the background.
>
> Now my final stumbling block is that in the real case the "ping" commands
> will be replaced by other commands which do not produce any output and
hence
> the control never transfers to the main thread. (Which is why I had "ping
> 10.0.0.0 -n 10 -w 1000 > NUL" in the first place to simulate long running
> processes with no output.)
>
> If only we could force control back to the main thread, we would be thru !
> Very eager to hear from you ...

Sorry, I can't understand what you mean.
Can you explain with some psedo-code?

> -- Shanko

Park Heesob.