Re: gdk_input_add select wrapper problem

Okay, I didn't receive any responses to this, so I guess everyone agreed
with me :-). So could the following patch be applied, or is this not the
right place to submit patches? This is against gtk 1.1.1.

--- gdk.c~      Thu Jul  9 17:40:49 1998
+++ gdk.c       Thu Sep  3 09:28:54 1998
@@ -1728,7 +1728,7 @@
              if (FD_ISSET (input->source, &exceptfds))
                condition |= GDK_INPUT_EXCEPTION;
-             if (condition && input->function)
+             if ((condition & input->condition) && input->function)
                (* input->function) (input->data, input->source,

Michael Babcock wrote:
> Hello,
> I recently wrote a C++ wrapper to the select() function. I called it a
> Selector. Basically you could register and unregister handlers with it
> and it would handle read and write events on a file descriptor by
> calling your handlers. It worked fine in my terminal mode networking
> program, but when I needed to connect a GUI written in Gtk-- to the
> networking code, I realized I needed to use Gtk's event loop, not my
> own. So I made Selector into an abstract base class, called my select()
> wrapper Unix_selector, and created a new class derived from Selector,
> Gtk_selector, to wrap gdk_input_add et al instead of select().
> First, the only docs I found on gdk_input_add was the tutorial, which
> doesn't explain that GDK_INPUT_READ and GDK_INPUT_WRITE are meant to be
> bitmasks so you need to do "if (condition & GDK_INPUT_READ)", not "if
> (condition == GDK_INPUT_READ)". This definitely needs to be documented!
> My first question was whether I could separately register two different
> callbacks for the same fd, one for read and one for write. I need to do
> this for my interface. Again, no docs, so I looked at the source code
> for gdk_input_add and gdk_input_remove, and it seems like it should
> work. However it didn't. For example, even though I requested read
> condition from gdk_input_add, my callback was getting called even when
> the read condition didn't happen, merely because some other module in
> the program requested write event notification on the same fd. (In a big
> program, the other module might even be written by another person.)
> Well, since there is no documentation, I suppose you could argue that
> this is intended behavior, but it does seem non intuitive and bizarre
> and so I'd say it's a bug. My guess is that the intention was if you
> want read and write events on the same fd, to pass a single callback
> with condition (GDK_INPUT_READ | GDK_INPUT_WRITE). That's fine (although
> again the bitmask nature of the parameter needs to be documented) but
> there's no reason not to support separate callbacks also. I believe it's
> a one line change to gdk.c, at the end of the gdk_event_wait function,
> change:
>               if (condition && input->function)
>                 (* input->function) (input->data, input->source,
> condition);
> to:
>               if ((condition & input->condition) && input->function)
>                 (* input->function) (input->data, input->source,
> condition);
> This will prevent callbacks from being called for a condition they
> didn't request. It seems unlikely that this would break any existing
> code, so could this be applied to the source tree? I've already made a
> workaround for the strange behavior in my Gtk_selector class, but I
> still think it would be nice if this was fixed.
> - Michael

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]