On 11/11/2010 20:13, Frank Eory wrote: saw in some places in the forum, I saw a recommendation to do lock() awake() unlock(). I have it in my big program in the lock() unlock() awake() order and if I change it to the recommended way, my program freezes. > > The add_timeout works on whole seconds. I am going to revisit the concept and > see if I can modify the algorithm to do the delay in a chunk of one second, > instead of looping multiple times and asking less than one second.
No, add_timeout() and repeat_timeout() accept double as argument and looping every eg. 0.1 s is pretty cheap: you can for instance examine a thread-shared variable with a mutex. I used this approach instead of awake() - which was for me unreliable a few years ago, but things might changed in the mean time. R. _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
