Re: TreeView: Multiple selection inefficient?
- From: Matthias Kaeppler <nospam digitalraid com>
- To: gtk-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: TreeView: Multiple selection inefficient?
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:45:38 +0200
John Gill wrote:
Andrew is suggesting you insert a small delay in between getting the
signal the 'selection_changed' signal and actually doing something about it.
By adding the delay you allow time for then next signal to come along +
if you get a second signal you should reset the timer to zero, to allow
for yet another user event. By tuning the size of the delay you'll cut
down the number of signals for which you actually do something and
performance should be good.
You need to check-out gobject.timeout_add() and gobject.source_remove(),
which will allow you to set your processing to be triggered after the
delay. source_remove is needed so that you can cancel an earlier
timeout_add when you get a second 'selection_changed' event.
Hope that helps.
John
Matthias Kaeppler wrote:
Andrew E. Makeev wrote:
> I think, it is not GTK+ neither GTKMM issue.
>
> You have to delay signal handler just until user keep send events to
> your application.
> Set timer callback where you will call "selection_changed" handler, and
> reset it after each user event that changes selection.
>
> Regards,
> -andrew
Hm, I'm not sure what you mean, can you elaborate on that? Sorry for my
ignorance, I'm fairly new to the whole Gtk thing.
--
Matthias Kaeppler
_______________________________________________
gtk-list mailing list
gtk-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
gtk-list mailing list
gtk-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
That sounds reasonable. However, this delay has to be rather small, in
order not to confuse the user if something is supposed to happen on
selection. But if e.g. there are delays lilke 1 second between the
selections, the problem is there again.
--
Matthias Kaeppler
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]