On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:33:48 +0800 Brian Wang <[email protected]> said:

> How about the lock key?  On a portable gadget, the power button is
> often used as a lock button.  Here is the scenario:
> * WM handles the POWER button, which is configured to call a lock app.
> * POWER button is pressed -> lock-app starts up, brings down the LCM,
> and scales the cpu frequency down just enough to handle the background
> task (music playback, for instance)
> * POWER button is pressed (while the LCM is powered down) -> another
> lock-app instance (which will check for the existence of another
> lock-app) will be launched  by the WM 5 seconds after the button is
> pressed.  Yes, I've tested this on my board...
> 
> This is bad in terms of responsiveness.  I thought if there's some way
> the app can handle this key itself, the latency may be minimized.
> Maybe I'm wrong.  But since it is not possible for the app to snatch
> the key event from wm, I don't know if it's just CPU too busy to
> handle the key or the WM delivers the event too late.
> 
> Or this is just plain wrong to handle the POWER button this way?

i think this image says it all:

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/7/25/128930549610788748.jpg

what possessed you to EXECTUE a process every button press AND expect good
interactivity?

-- 
------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    [email protected]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to