Austin Donnelly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Monday, 27 Mar 2000, Simon Budig wrote:
> > Is there any chance to do this on an "per image" base without
> > hazzeling too much?
>
> I proposed to add per-image locking a while ago, but apparently this
> wasn't too well liked. I'm can't remember why.
>
> There are 2 tricky parts (as far as I can see):
>
> A) plug-in.c needs to take out an image lock when starting a plugin
> operation, and release it on normal (or equally importantly)
> abnormal plugin termination.
>
> B) what happens when acquiring a lock fail? Do you queue the
> operation up on the lock (hard) or do you fail it (easy)?
I think, proper locking is among the first things that should go in
Gimp 1.3. However, it may be a little bit late for 1.2 :-(
What Im thinking about is: Every user action starts in the image
window. When we prevent
a) clicks in the image to take effect
b) selection of menu items (graying out?)
if this image is "locked" we have a lot of potential crashes fixed.
We could even give some sort of feedback through the cursor.
Well, when a script or plugin randomly accesses the locked image
then this is bad luck, but I think this should not happen too
often.
The way described above eventually could be handled inside
the callbacks. Mitch: Do you see a chance to get it working this
way? Is this reasonable?
Bye,
Simon
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/
