Re: Quick question about the event loop
- From: Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferrieux@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 May 2007 16:10:59 -0700
On May 23, 12:47 am, Darren New <d...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...] so you don't have to change http or smtp to
make it work the way you want. (From what I can tell, your proposal does
this already, but it's hard to be sure without thinking about it a whole
bunch.)
Yes, this transparency is the exact purpose of my proposal.
The idea is that between a push/pop pair, you have a clear slate,
exactly like on interp init.
All previously registered handlers are "frozen", but reactivated when
you cross the "pop".
Questions are likely to come up with multiple
vwaitadmin push calls, what happens if you do
vwaitadmin push
fileevent ...
vwaitadmin pop
(is the fileevent still around?)
No. The handler state is restored as it was before the push.
(with possible delayed-removal of fileevents whose channels have been
closed between push and pop)
vwaitadmin push
(is the fileevent disabled now?)
Which fileevent ? ;-)
The slate is empty here.
I think the simple answers would work, but again I'd have to think about
it a whole bunch. Possibly adding sufficient introspection to stuff that
this can be done at the command level as a library might be better...
Yes, I had thought about this too. I would also have preferred the
introspection method, because it allows to write much less in C and
much more in Tcl, however it adds a big load of complexity because it
implies to invent a script-level representation for handlers which are
internal (like Windows Event objects or hidden /dev/dsp file
descriptor in Snack, or the equally hidden X11 socket fd); and as
mentioned above, to make it worse, even already scriptable handlers
like [after] are currently not "freezable"...
While a more traditional, monolithic C implementation would simply
juggle the pointers to (a stack of) saved and current list-of-event-
sources (off the top of my hat -- currently I'm ignorant of all the
details)...
-Alex
.
- References:
- Re: Quick question about the event loop
- From: Darren New
- Re: Quick question about the event loop
- Prev by Date: Re: Quick question about the event loop
- Next by Date: Re: Quick question about the event loop
- Previous by thread: Re: Quick question about the event loop
- Next by thread: Re: Quick question about the event loop
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
