| Re: [AD] X11 unresponsiveness |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
> Yes. But the thing is, we have a very small patch, which actually
> improves the signals version a bit. So I see no reason to not apply it.
> Admitted, the improvement does not affect the general problem. But
> actually *requiring* polling would be a big step.
Yes. In effect, it would change behavior for a supporte platform. Which is
bad.
The threaded version is already the default version build if pthreads is
installed. I don't think we need to take more active steps to encourage
its use over the sigalrm version.
> After all this years
> where we got away without it. And then taking a possible improvement as
> the time to introduce it. So, my view is, *encourage* using polling by
> stating it in the docs, and adjusting all the examples to query the
> driver if polling is required and do it in that case.
In which case the needs_poll() family of functions should be changed to act
sensibly instead of turning on polling for platforms that don't need it.
This too is breaking the API a little (meaning it can't be done for 4.0),
but to be honest I never understood why the need_poll() functions would
also toggle the behavior.
Evert