Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Thursday November 19 2015 19:15:39 René J.V. Bertin wrote: > ... Grand Central Dispatch ... https://github.com/RJVB/KIdleTiming/commit/9514bf13b1d921e481fa6074d08fef58139dd986 Deliciously imprecise for the amateurs: almost 10% late almost systematically for the first 5000ms timeout of the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/#review88573 --- Hello folks, Martin Graesslin has asked the CWG to step in

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Thursday November 19 2015 08:10:08 Martin Graesslin wrote: > I want to apologize for saying that. Please be aware that this was only > intended as a description of code (yes I also call code written by myself > idiotic and worse things) and not against you. Apology accepted, but please

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 4:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> Again - this is not against IOKit or what Apple does, but your usage > of QTimer in your code. RRs are meant for constructive feedback, and Oh, I can use Grand Central Dispatch if that makes you feel better, but in the end something will have to check at certain times of interest whether

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 12:52 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Thursday November 19 2015 15:21:10 Dario Freddi wrote: > * KIdleTime strives to be as lightweight as possible. This is something >which came from the old approach used in KDE3/4 powermanagement which was ... >resource (aka: the power manager) to take care of this, but it was deemed >crazy to

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

Hi all, On 19 November 2015 at 15:06, René J.V. wrote: > On Thursday November 19 2015 08:10:08 Martin Graesslin wrote: >> the code else where, but because the issues pointed out would be unresolved >> giving users of your code a bad framework and thus harming both your users

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 17, 2015, 10:58 p.m., Lamarque Souza wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.h, line 24 > > > > > > Nitpick: this should go after #include > > René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Any guidelines that dictate

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

There's something else that's been bothering me since I realised it: KIdleTime has been written with the assumption that'll always work, and that whatever initialisation is required never fails. That must be why the return value from setupPoller() is discarded. Maybe this all holds true on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

Hi René, just thought I'd clarify some things as the creator/former maintainer of all this - which might also justify some of Martin's positions. The idea behind KIdleTime is that the framework shall be a lightweight, non-critical framework for those applications which want to know about the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

Given I already stepped in... 2015-11-19 10:36 GMT+01:00 René J.V. : > > Now it's just bad code, eh? > > Just for the record: no one but Apple really knows what IOKit considers being > idle but it clearly involves absence of user input events. That's "user > idle", not

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

2015-11-19 17:17 GMT+01:00 René J.V. : > On Thursday November 19 2015 15:21:10 Dario Freddi wrote: > >> * KIdleTime strives to be as lightweight as possible. This is something >>which came from the old approach used in KDE3/4 powermanagement which was > ... >>resource (aka:

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

Il Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:28:27 +0100, René J.V. Bertin ha scritto: > If we're starting to call names arguing indeed becomes pointless as the > apparent lack of actual reading my arguments already suggested. It In the interest of the CoC and before people heat up, Martin said: "Thus the code is

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 18, 2015, 5:35 p.m.) Status -- This change has been

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 18, 2015, 5:35 p.m.) Review request for KDE Software on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Wednesday November 18 2015 15:01:59 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > idiotic If we're starting to call names arguing indeed becomes pointless as the apparent lack of actual reading my arguments already suggested. It leaves me with no other choice but to discard the RR and put up a mirror in place.

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 8:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 17, 2015, 11:58 p.m., Lamarque Souza wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.h, line 24 > > > > > > Nitpick: this should go after #include Any guidelines that dictate this? > On Nov. 17, 2015, 11:58

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 17, 2015, 11:58 p.m., Lamarque Souza wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller_helper.mm, line 54 > > > > > > Usually when a new operation returns 0 it is because system is on short > > on RAM memory (or

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 8:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 8:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 8:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

> On Nov. 18, 2015, 8:22 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp, lines 222-227 > > > > > > seriously? You care about idle timeouts below 5 msec? This is a > > framework to tell the

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Wednesday, November 18, 2015 5:28:27 PM CET René J.V. Bertin wrote: > On Wednesday November 18 2015 15:01:59 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > idiotic > > If we're starting to call names arguing indeed becomes pointless as the > apparent lack of actual reading my arguments already suggested. It leaves

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/#review88505 --- src/plugins/osx/macpoller.h (line 24)

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/#review88509 --- src/plugins/osx/macpoller.cpp (lines 144 - 149)

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 17, 2015, 10:12 p.m.) Review request for KDE Software on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 16, 2015, 4:42 p.m.) Review request for KDE Software on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/#review88418 --- Here's a debugging trace after hitting a breakpoint set on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Monday November 16 2015 12:29:49 René J.V. Bertin wrote: > If that's the intended behaviour, why does the KIdleTime example work on > Linux, without "restarting" `catchNextResumeEvent`?? Sorry for the rapid fire of growing messages - that comes with asking questions through RRs ... I

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 16, 2015, 11:03 p.m.) Review request for KDE Software on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/ --- (Updated Nov. 16, 2015, 11:15 p.m.) Review request for KDE Software on

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126078/#review88390 --- src/plugins/osx/macpoller.h (line 31)

Re: Review Request 126078: [OS X] modernising the KIdleTime plugin (WIP!)

On Nov. 16, 2015, 12:19 a.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > In fact, I'm quite sure that as is it already is broken without the #define Hmm? What do you think I broke that wasn't broken before (again, apart from the bare idle time detection, the original code doesn't work for me). Anyway, I'm