Den 18:06 15. mars 2012 skrev Wade Tregaskis <wadesli...@mac.com> følgende:
> Highly subjective, though, I recognise that. I think we've pretty much run > this discussion to its end now, and it doesn't appear I've swayed you. > That's okay. Yes we have, but you have actually swayed me... :) You made me think of how we could have it both ways. I think perhaps what would be cool, is if the responsibility to achieve concurrency was given to the controllers or models instead of the views/event handling system. What if each model object could formally specify which of its KVC properties depend on some shared memory, and which only depend on the object's internal state? In that case the controller might see that all the document's properties are free from such constraints, and can be set in a separate thread. But that would require the controllers sharing some knowledge between them, so perhaps the thread handling could be done by NSObject's implementation instead, if that wouldn't cause more overhead in the KVC methods. I know you can specify some properties as asynchronous, but I haven't even looked into what that means if you implement the getters and setters yourself. I haven't done much Obj-C programming for a long time. What I mean is, what if there was some abstracted way of just registering/reporting the concurrency constraints (or dependencies if you like) for some object, and let the bindings system make sure the getters and setters are called in the right thread, without having to actually implement all the boilerplate code to handle the threading yourself. If the object doesn't specify any such constraints or policy then the setters are always called in the main thread, because that will always be safe. Just a very crude thought, really! I haven't given this much thought and perhaps there are very good reasons to avoid such an idea. But with such a system, your application's threading strategy wouldn't be dependent on some predefined model, and of course you could just not specify any constraints, and handle it all yourself if you like. Just a very crude thought. But in practice that would still mean single threaded by default, which I think is alright, because if you expect multiple threads, and everything is done in one thread, everything will still work. The opposite is not true. But this has been an interesting discussion, after all! Thanks for the discussion. Per _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
