On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:08 AM, John Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Doesn't it make more sense - given two incompatible event loops - one > gui based and one network based - to give the network loop priority, > and have it call back into the gui loop? Very generally speaking a > gui tends to demand less responsiveness than the network (though this > may not be the case on current hardware for the kind of applications > that people are targeting with pyglet).
Of course. It's just that that's what it's set up like right now, and performance is lousy, so I was exploring alternatives. The people on the twisted list asserted that twisted need to control the run loop, anyway. I'm hoping to find some time today to set up a reproducible example of the problem. > Can pyglet app EventLoop develop a non-blocking step()/pump() or some > such name alternative to run()? Good question. (that I can't answer) ~ Nathan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
