Amebis/wxWidgets
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 8 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

remove mention of wxMutexGuiEnter/leave from the multithreading topic overview; document that wxMutexGuiEnter only works for wxMSW as the code seems to confirm this (see #10366)

Browse Source 
git-svn-id: https://svn.wxwidgets.org/svn/wx/wxWidgets/trunk@58683 c3d73ce0-8a6f-49c7-b76d-6d57e0e08775
This commit is contained in:
Francesco Montorsi
2009-02-05 18:24:27 +00:00
parent 06f89fe437
commit ae93dddfaf
2 changed files with 28 additions and 19 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

37
docs/doxygen/overviews/thread.h
View File

@@ -6,6 +6,11 @@
// Licence: wxWindows license
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/*
NOTE: we explicitely don't name wxMutexGUIEnter() and wxMutexGUILeave()
as they're not safe. See also ticket #10366.
*/
/**
@page overview_thread Multithreading
@@ -20,27 +25,29 @@ wxWidgets resembles to POSIX1.c threads API (a.k.a. pthreads), although several
functions have different names and some features inspired by Win32 thread API
are there as well.
These classes will hopefully make writing MT programs easier and they also
provide some extra error checking (compared to the native (be it Win32 or
Posix) thread API), however it is still a non-trivial undertaking especially
for large projects. Before starting an MT application (or starting to add MT
These classes hopefully make writing MT programs easier and they also
provide some extra error checking (compared to the native - be it Win32 or
Posix - thread API), however it is still a non-trivial undertaking especially
for large projects.
Before starting an MT application (or starting to add MT
features to an existing one) it is worth asking oneself if there is no easier
and safer way to implement the same functionality. Of course, in some
situations threads really make sense (classical example is a server application
which launches a new thread for each new client), but in others it might be an
overkill. On the other hand, the recent evolution of the computer hardware shows
and safer way to implement the same functionality.
Of course, in some situations threads really make sense (classical example is a
server application which launches a new thread for each new client), but in others
it might be an overkill.
On the other hand, the recent evolution of the computer hardware shows
an important trend towards multi-core systems, which are better exploited using
multiple threads (e.g. you may want to split a long task among as many threads
as many CPU (cores) the system reports; see wxThread::GetCPUCount).
To implement non-blocking operations without using multiple threads you have
two other possible implementation choices:
- using wxIdleEvent (e.g. to perform a long calculation while updating a progress dialog)
- simply do everything at once but call wxWindow::Update() periodically to update the screen.
To implement non-blocking operations @e without using multiple threads you have
two possible implementation choices:
- use wxIdleEvent (e.g. to perform a long calculation while updating a progress dialog)
- do everything at once but call wxWindow::Update() or wxApp::YieldFor(wxEVT_CATEGORY_UI)
periodically to update the screen.
Even if there are the ::wxMutexGuiEnter and ::wxMutexGuiLeave functions which allows
to use GUI functions from multiple threads, if you do decide to use threads in your
application, it is strongly recommended that <b>no more than one calls GUI functions</b>.
If instead you choose to use threads in your application, it is strongly recommended
that <b>no secondary threads call GUI functions</b>.
The design which uses one GUI thread and several worker threads which communicate
with the main one using @b events is much more robust and will undoubtedly save you
countless problems (example: under Win32 a thread can only access GDI objects such