Bill, Joe, et al,

While we are at it, we may consider using the Hamlib API to get the list of
rigs.

Example code can be seen near line 1190 here:

http://sourceforge.net/p/hamlib/code/ci/master/tree/tests/rigctl_parse.c

73,

-- Edson PY2SDR

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Joe Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> I agree that options 2, 3, and 4 should be workable.  Do you want to go
> ahead with, say, option 2?
>
>         -- Joe
>
>
> On 8/5/2013 12:35 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
>
>> On 05/08/2013 16:35, Joe Taylor wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>>> If you see any show-stoppers or have other
>>>> reservations, please make them known!
>>>>
>>>
>>> As it happens, I found an issue just minutes after sending the
>>> previous email. I was in a JT65 QSO and transmitting (as I always do)
>>> with the audio monitor on my transceiver turned ON.
>>>
>>> Opening the Configuration screen during a transmission causes an brief
>>> audio interruption. This is bad! Maybe it's the reason that audio
>>> needs to be done in its own thread rather than the GUI thread? Bill,
>>> please investigate...
>>>
>> This is due to the way we use a separate process to run the hamlib
>> utility rigctl to get the list of supported radios. The config dialog
>> blocks waiting for it to finish for up to 1s.
>>
>> There are a few of options:
>>
>> 1) reduce the wait delay - not good since we shouldn't be blocking the
>> GUI thread anyway,
>>
>> 2) don't wait and let the combo box of radios fill asynchronously (it is
>> already using a signal so this is trivial). Currently we put the 9998 &
>> 9999 entries in after the wait, but we could hook the QProcess
>> finished() signal to do that.
>>
>> 3) use the hamlib API to lookup the supported radios assuming it can do
>> it fast enough - if it can't then a QFuture might be ideal as it could
>> return the full list on completion.
>>
>> 4) Build the setup dialog at program startup and use show()/hide() to
>> present it. This has the downside that it wouldn't pickup new audio
>> devices, but that could be fixed pretty easily.
>>
>> I think (2) is probably best value for the work although (3) is worth
>> investigating at some point. The consequence of (2) is that the user
>> might see the combobox of radios filling but that isn't serious IMHO.
>>
>>>
>>> -- Joe, K1JT
>>>
>> 73
>> Bill
>> G4WJS.
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wsjt-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.berlios.de/**mailman/listinfo/wsjt-devel<https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wsjt-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.berlios.de/**mailman/listinfo/wsjt-devel<https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>
_______________________________________________
Wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to