Re: [gtk-list] Re: thread safe gtk?

[Rob Browning <rlb cs utexas edu>]

I thought I'd forward this too since it's relevant to anyone following
this thread.  It's an improved way to handle the X pipe from Max.

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: 	Sun, 10 May 1998 01:07:41 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "M.Stekelenburg" <root@cal052304.student.utwente.nl>
Reply-To: M.Stekelenburg@student.utwente.nl
To: Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: [gtk-list] Re: thread safe gtk?
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95q.980510010212.1128B-100000@noviomagus.student.utwente.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

ok a better version of my code:
#define XOPEN write(Xpipe[1],"A",1);lock(xmutex);
#define XCLOSE signal(xthreadcond);unlock(xmutex);

the pipes etc remain the same but this also changes;

threadcall(){
  read(Xpipe[0],&c,1);
  wait(xthreadcond);
}


This use of threadconditions should make sure that control is transfered
from the gtk_main thread to the requesting and back.

But this construction is NOT tested.

Max


------- End of forwarded message -------