On Jul 5, 6:20 pm, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 8:42 AM, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > > On Jul 5, 11:00 am, Web Dreamer <webdrea...@nospam.fr> wrote: > >> What he means is that On Mac, if you close "all" windows, the application > >> is > >> still running. > > > Then that is NOT closing windows that is only ICONIFIYING/HIDING them. > > Let's use the correct lingo people! > > Actually, it IS closing those windows. Why wouldn't it be? > [...] > The memory used by that window can be reclaimed. Handles to its > objects are no longer valid. The window really is closed. The > application might not have terminated, but that window has not been > minimized - the *window* is closed.
And you need the OS to that for you!?!? Are you joking? > I could conceivably write a program that sits invisibly in the > background until a network message arrives. Upon receipt of such a > message, the program initializes the GUI subsystem and opens a window. > When the user closes the window, the program flushes all GUI code out > of memory and waits for the next message. While it's waiting, is there > any "main window" that exists but has just been hidden? No. But is the > application still running? Of course! Completely separate. And so could i using Tkinter and it's "supposedly" flawed window hierarchy. Remind me again why we are discussing this? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
