Re: Threads and gtkmm

[Yann Leydier <yann leydier info>]

Thanks Chris !

> Yann Leydier<yann leydier info>  wrote:
> > Thanks for the info. I was still using g_idle_connect with static
> > methods to communicate between threads…
>
> I assume you mean g_idle_add(), and that's a perfectly good way to do
> it, and is thread safe, but you forfeit trackability.  (Although if you
> are passing static class member functions to the callback argument of
> g_idle_add() you technically have undefined behaviour because static
> member functions have C++ linkage specification and not C linkage.
> However, it will work OK with gcc, and glibmm does it, so you are not
> adding any greater unportability.)

Yeah, sorry, I mistyped the name !

It works with GCC and seems to work also as well with Visual Studio 2008.

> The first won't work because Dispatchers can't be copied (this is a
> feature not a bug).  The second is not desirable because passing around
> Dispatchers by pointer is likely to leave your code with dangling
> pointers.
> If a Dispatcher is a class member, why not provide an accessor
> function, or make it a public member?  These would be the normal ways of
> doing it (as with sigc::signal objects).

I'd rather not use an accessor to improve genericity of the object 
recieving the Dispatcher. I think I'll use shared (and perhaps weak) 
pointers.

yann