development list
Subject: Re: [Plplot-devel] Recent progress with wxwidgets IPC
Hi Phil:
You make a lot of points about some uncertainties in what I propose to
do. And I do agree there are such uncertainties. So this is
definitely a "show them the code" moment. At worst, I will strip
Hi Phil:
You make a lot of points about some uncertainties in what I propose to
do. And I do agree there are such uncertainties. So this is
definitely a "show them the code" moment. At worst, I will strip it
all out again because it will turn out to be complex and slow. But it
could be
Hi Alan
That seems reasonable. I'm not sure what the benefits are though.
Should the new way be quicker?
In terms of the overall complexity here are some of the things I found
while setting up the current system that each made the system more
complex than I initially envisaged. I imagine you will
On 2017-02-06 23:52- p.d.rosenb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Alan
> Not exactly sure what you mean by complex? It is not always possible
to send all data, as the shared memory is finite size and therefore
the data to be sent may be bigger than the shared memory.
Hi Phil:
To get a preview of
presume it's this named semaphore and/or memory flags that you intend to
remove?
Phil
Sent from my Windows 10 phone
From: Alan W. Irwin
Sent: 06 February 2017 21:31
To: Phil Rosenberg; PLplot development list
Subject: Re: [Plplot-devel] Recent progress with wxwidgets IPC
On 2017-02-04 19:41-0800
On 2017-02-04 19:41-0800 Alan W. Irwin wrote:
> So in the ideal case (where all steps below ultimately work and there
> are no efficiency reductions due to any of these steps) the remaining
> planned steps in this development effort for the
> -DPL_HAVE_UNNAMED_POSIX_SEMAPHORES=ON case are as
Hi Phil:
You have probably noticed my recent push of commit 3da0c90. That
commit contains my recent (fairly small amount of) wxwidgets IPC code
progress. The unnamed semaphores method requires the shared memory
buffer be a struct (so that the buffer contains room for the required
semaphores as
