Al Boldi wrote:
> Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
>> On 11/19/06, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Great! You know, making things thread-safe is really not that
>>> difficult; what's important is to keep it in mind from the beginning,
>>> and avoid things like global vars/dependencies, which is a big no-no for
>>> threadability.
>> What do you mean by dependencies?
>
> Thread-safe code that builds on libs that are not thread-safe, which makes
> the endproduct not thread-safe.
>
>>> I tried the GTK and it looks thread-safe. The same goes for ms.
>>>
>>> The problem is with the fpc-wrappers; afaict, none of them are
>>> thread-safe.
>> You mean the Free Pascal Gtk bindings? They are just direct
>> translations from the c headers. I don´t see how they could generate
>> non-thread-safeness.
>
> Correct, the bindings are ok; it's things like the MessageBox wrapper that
> aren't thread-safe.
>
> I wonder what would be more useful: make the current wrappers thread-safe,
> or introduce a set of thread-safe independent wrappers, or forget about
> threading and work on an IPC component?
>
> All of them have their pros/cons, and having them all is probably best, but
> which one do you think is easiest?
The whole VCL/LCL is in its desing not thread safe. It is designed to
handle gui actions in the main thread.
This made the design a whole lot simpler and avoided bloat.
So designing something between the LCL and the libs which is thread
safe, isn't worth the effort.
Marc
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
