On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> wrote:

​> ​
This is good enough for now. We can use the simpler, blocking, code during
development.

​I'm beginning to wonder whether there is a simple non-blocking solution,
based on the blocking code.
  Iirc, the blocking code uses a "busy" form of waiting.  A subclass might
just override that with a method that does the waiting in the background.
I'll investigate this next...


Edward

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to