mutual exclusion issue

[eran otzar]

hello ive got an application wich uses a collection in this case a queue from diffrent thereads

an object gets enqueued in one thread while anouther gets dequeued in a diffrent thread

these actions might accure simultaneously wich would resolve in an exception such as argument out of range exception , when the collections counter is being redifined.

now im looking for a "good looking" and right why to exclude these actions from one anouther

(1)what i mean by "good looking" is that i dont want to create my own collection derived from this one wich includes a lock(object) machenisem

(2) i dont want to use the brain storming idea i hade, wich is pretty "ugly"

enqueueOk = false;
while (enqueueOk)
{
try
{
Qsockets.Enqueue(currentSoc);
reEnqueueOk = true;
}
catch { }
}

i thought of course using the a lock or a mutex but that would be the case only if i wrap these actions in a procdure wich would be called from each thread,abd decide either to enqueue or dequeue wich would also be long and "ugly"

any ideas would be appricated ...
10x

[GaryTexmo]

If you're accessing an object across multiple threads, I still think you should do locking. It's better to be safe with that kind of thing. That's not a very hard thing to do though, just surround your object with a lock block...

List<string> myList = new List();
...
lock (myList)
{
  // do an action on myList here
}

Anyway, more to your point... can you use the Exists method (present on a List and there's a similar for a hashtable... not sure of your data type) to see if something is in your queue before you try to access it?

lock (myList)
{
  if (myList.Contains(item))
    myList.Remove(item);
}

Something like that?

[hype261]

I would consider using a Semaphore for your problem instead of a Mutex. The Semaphore is designed for situations where you have a producer and consumer relationships.