[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we go GTK-only?
From: |
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu |
Subject: |
Re: Can we go GTK-only? |
Date: |
Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:00:50 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (Shijō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 15:49:02 -0700, Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>
>>>>> said:
>> Ideally, yes, I definitely think we should split the Emacs process into
>> various threads:
>> - some threads for the GUI.
>> - one thread for the Elisp engine (which receives events from the GUI
>> threads among others).
>>
>> So the GUI thread would handle the expose events, read-locking the
>> matrices, while the redisplay would run in another thread,
>> write-locking
>> those same matrices.
> Agreed. That's basically how IntelliJ works too. We can do even better too:
> there's no reason these parts need to run in the same process it even the
> same machine.
Cocoa (maybe also for GNUstep?) has a restriction that GUI events must
be processed in the main thread. Probably the Lisp thread also wants
to be main, especially when we start it by a tty-only session and then
add a GUI session via multi-tty. So we have to separate processes for
GUI front-end and Lisp back-end to support such situations, anyway.
If we can separate them cleanly, then it might be possible to create a
front-end for iPad that communicates with a Lisp back-end running in
another machine. It would also work around the GTK+ problem about
multi-tty mentioned in this "thread".
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
address@hidden
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, (continued)
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/28
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Ken Raeburn, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?,
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <=
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Ken Raeburn, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/30
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/31
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/31