Re: event-loop thread changing

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1218 bytes --]

Hi Andrew,

On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 10:17 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow.  The calls to .start() I've seen were all 
> intentional:
> 
> - do some stop/start actions with the event-loop in the current thread
> - [later] create a separate event-loop thread
> 
> It is just that with the event-loop handling ptrace, the operation isn't 
> allowed.

Right. And that is why I suggest getting rid of one of the options
(actually it would probably be better to also not make it implement
Runnable if you expect people to not use run() either). Exposing the
EventLoop as a Thread make people believe they can manipulate it as
such, which is clearly not what we intend. So just having one entry
point for starting/stopping (and in the case where people use
Thread.join() a eventloop died notification) makes it so people don't
accidentally do that. And by changing the class type you automatically
catch the bad users. The actual Thread that the event loop uses can then
just be hidden from the user and you could even turn the EventLoop into
a singleton since that is what you seem to want really that once it is
initialized it doesn't "change threads" later on.

Cheers,

Mark

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]