On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Thiago Macieira <thi...@kde.org> wrote: > On Friday, 4 de February de 2011 14:06:58 Dawit A wrote: >> BTW, there is one side issue I noticed in QProcess through this whole >> process. Why does QProcess not exit immediately if I invoke kill or >> terminate or even when it just timed out from waiting for the child >> process ? IOW, why wait some more for the child process to exit under >> those circumstances ? That is what unnecessarily prolongs or even >> doubles the blocking period. > > kill() or terminate() just send the signals. There's no guarantee that the > process will exit immediately, so why should QProcess notify you of that > immediately? This is especially true for SIGTERM, since that one can be caught > and handled.
Let us take out terminate from the equation. It is my mistake I included it here because its documentation states that "The process may not exit as a result of calling this function". However, I really do not understand why what you stated matters for the kill() and timed out scenarios... QProcess process; process.start(...); If the next command I issue is process.waitForFinished(); I expect it to wait 30 secs since that is what the default value for the timeout parameter states. There is no way I would expect it to block for another 30 sec when the variable goes out of scope because of its own internal implementation issues. It is doing waitForFinished on a child process it created itself. Nothing to do with the API caller. The case of the kill is even more baffling to me because its documentation clearly says "Kills the current process, causing it to exit immediately". So If I kill is invoked as such process.kill(); what should a reasonable expectation be ? To me the process gets killed immediately. Done, poof, gone. Instead that too blocks for the default amount of period if there are internally forked processes that are still running when the dtor is encountered yet again. Oh well, perhaps I am simply expecting QProcess to work the way it makes sense to me and am simply missing a larger point which I fail to recognize.
