On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 07:06:30PM +0000, Angus Leeming wrote: > > Maybe I misunderstood what you wanted to change in Qt. A "busy > > loop" would be one that chewed CPU despite no events arriving. > > This is what seems to happen in the Qt-equivalent. We get a > never-ending stream of calls to 'someNonTrivialFunction()' when > everything else is totally quiet.
Then we definitely want to continue using a timer for this. > Strategy 1 is to modify the main GUI loop, as above. > > Strategy 2 is to use a Timeout as we do currently, but use it only to > post the callbacks of these 'reaped_children' rather than, as now, > using it to both reap the zombies AND post the callbacks. I prefer the latter. > Basically, I'm at a bit of a loss. The reaping-children bit appears to > be optimized as the handler is invoked only when a SIGCHLD event is > emitted. It seems to be a real pity that we can't be similarly > efficient when posting the callbacks. Well, if Qt had support for reaping children... What routines need to know about children that have died? regards john -- "Spammers get STABBED by GOD." - Ron Echeverri
