I should have put the lock in and forgot... thanks for the reminder. I'm not at all sure how to handle "idle" in the callback case. One could just call the function forever, but that seems like burning the CPU for nothing. Alternatively, "idle" processing might want to take place in a different thread to be set up by whatever external code wants to do the idle processing, trusting to the OS to preempt to the callback thread when it becomes runnable.
cheers Miller On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 08:01:03PM +0100, Tim Blechmann wrote: > > The only major new "feature" in 0.41 is callback scheduling; > > out of curiosity, i had a brief look at the code ... two comments ... > > - has the support for the system lock been dropped for the callback > scheduler? > - is it intended that the sys_idlehook is called from the main thread > without any guard? > > best, tim > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://tim.klingt.org > > Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. > Confucius > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
