Re: g_timeout_add(0, ...)

[Peter Clifton <pcjc2 cam ac uk>]

On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 08:56 -0600, skip pobox com wrote:
> Peter> The handler added by g_idle_add() would have a different
>     Peter> execution priority than you might want.
> 
>     Peter> g_idle_add_full (G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, ...);
> 
>     Peter> Might be a closer equivalent to what the OP was wanting; some
>     Peter> means to get their callback called soon after the execution gets
>     Peter> back to the main-loop.
> 
> Yes.  Would g_timeout_add_full(G_PRIORITY_HIGH, ...) be even better or might
> the main loop not regain control before the callback executes?

Briefly scanning the source-code, I don't think so. The whole point of
these routines is that the callbacks are always called from the
mainloop. 


-- 
Peter Clifton

Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge,
9, JJ Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge
CB3 0FA

Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!)