I bet the "with messages" part isn't needed - doesn't that just allow UI
interaction, which may not be desirable during Martin's process? In
other words, I don't think it's necessary if you just want to free the
engine and/or OS to take a breath.
FWIW -
Phil Davis
Richard Gaskin wrote:
Martin Blackman wrote:
Microsoft Vista is classifying my Rev application as 'Not responding'
when it runs a particularly intensive handler. The title bar changes
and screen updates cease. But the program is still working just fine
underneath all that, and once the handler finishes Vista releases the
stranglehold and updates the window. However users may be
understandably concerned and will not see the progress bar update
normally shown by the program.
This does not happen on XP, it seems that Vista is a little
overzealous here.
I believe Rev does its garbage collection after a handler finishes. So
a big repeat loop could instead be changed to repeated calls to a sub
handler.
But I think this would add overhead and besides I'm struggling to
think of a way to modify a couple of my problematic handlers in this
fashion. Has anyone here had any successful dealings with this issue?
Just a hunch, but I wonder if adding "wait 0 with messages" would free
up enough clock cycles to let the OS feel more comfortable.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com
revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv
--
Phil Davis
PDS Labs
Professional Software Development
http://pdslabs.net
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
