[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [platform-swt-dev] MacOS X port status?
|
> in the next office - ONE EVENT!
*grin* okay okay...
> The disadvantage to this kind of helper method (other than increasing code
> bulk) is that it is useless. A real app needs a termination condition. A
You are correct, applications need a termination condition, which
is why I'm not really thinking of a helper method. Rather I would
like to do away with nesting altogether in favour of a wholly
centralized event dispatch. Problem in, in Java, the only way
to store execution state is with threads. So we'd just end up
with an AWT-like solution, which is unacceptable.
That said, we don't really need the concurrency threads
provide. So it would be possible to implement a system
where threads never actually execute concurrently, hence
no need for added synchronization of API. But again,
I'm just speculating.
> There are enough real problems implementing SWT on different platforms so
> why invent more? I think this covers your discussion of "coroutines"
> which could never be implemented unless we had complete control over
threading
> and access to the private state of the operating system - this is never
> happening.
Oh geez. Of course they couldn't be implemented!!! Not without language
and OS support and all the works. I'm not suggesting we try to do anything
of the sort... just thinking abstractly which isn't always practical.
Supporting
parallel modal contexts means no event loop nesting and it means clients
must have a way to suspend their flow of execution until a condition is met.
Exit conditions fall under the same heading as well.
> Also, I repeat "sendEvent" and "postEvent" are implementation details of
> SWT.
That's why I mentioned them, actually. The topic of this message thread
is "McOS X port status". Should anyone choose to model their port after
existing SWT concepts, I feel they should be aware of some of the sequencing
issues resulting from our support of multiple event loops. I'm not saying
their existence is in any way intrinsic to all SWT implementations. Perhaps
I'm just stating the obvious.
> Please submit sample code that shows "stale data" tree thing so we can fix
> the bug or document the behavior. That's way more useful that a
philosophical
> discussion about event orderings.
The problem in question was fixed months ago I believe. I could go
hunting for more.
> So, Jeff Skywalker don't fall for the Dark Side. Not sure if I'm Darth
> Vader?
EEEEEvil... http://www.narbonic.com/080700.html =)
At any rate, this discussion is rather moot since evidently
SWT works just fine the way it is and there's no incentive
to change anything unless we can prove it is deficient in
some way, and changing it would make a real difference.
Truce, Lord Vader?
