On 27/06/2008, Luca Olivetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you see any adverse effect of this workaround?
> I mean, I think the timer fires in the context of the main thread
> (otherwise checksynchronize would raise an exception) but outside the
> main application loop.
I can't see any issue
En/na Luca Olivetti ha escrit:
> En/na Graeme Geldenhuys ha escrit:
>
>>> This is *really* bad, since a user could inadvertently stop the
>>> background threads.
>>> I could try some workaround (i.e not using synchronize but set some
>>> variables in the main form and use a timer to update the vis
En/na Luca Olivetti ha escrit:
> En/na Graeme Geldenhuys ha escrit:
>
>>> This is *really* bad, since a user could inadvertently stop the
>>> background threads.
>>> I could try some workaround (i.e not using synchronize but set some
>>> variables in the main form and use a timer to update the vis
En/na Graeme Geldenhuys ha escrit:
>> This is *really* bad, since a user could inadvertently stop the
>> background threads.
>> I could try some workaround (i.e not using synchronize but set some
>> variables in the main form and use a timer to update the visual
>> compnents) but it's ugly and err
2008/6/26 Luca Olivetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> My main reason is that the layout of the screeen(s) has to be fixed,
>> besides avoiding the dragging of the form avoids freezing threads
>> waiting on a Synchronize (though dragging a scrollbar will freeze them
>> anyway, and that's really bad for my
En/na Luca Olivetti ha escrit:
> My main reason is that the layout of the screeen(s) has to be fixed,
> besides avoiding the dragging of the form avoids freezing threads
> waiting on a Synchronize (though dragging a scrollbar will freeze them
> anyway, and that's really bad for my application).
