Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: [Gnash] Playing multiple movies at the same time

[strk]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 12:07:22PM +0200, Sergio Garcia wrote:

> I was thinking in having multiple instances of the vm at the same time, each 
> with
> it's own movie, renderers, gc and so on.

Yes, that would be even better, but of course it's more work :)

> I think that the first step should moving all the static functions and objets 
> to the VM class or create a new one for that pourposse and point the static 
> function 
> to it. For example:

I reccommend using the existing one. One nice thing of singletons is that it's
easier to make them non-singleton classes.

> void VM::set_base_url(const URL& url)
> {
>         // can call this only once during a single run
>         assert(!globals::baseurl.get());
>         globals::baseurl.reset(new URL(url));
>         log_msg(_("Base url set to: %s"), globals::baseurl->str().c_str());
> }
> void
> set_base_url(const URL& url)
> {
>         VN::get().set_base_url(url);
> }

Well, if the VM is not a singleton, VM::get() wouldn't make sense anymore.
Rather, all VM-related parts (including characters, and the movie_root (stage)) 
would
need to have it's own pointer to the VM.

> Later we should remove the static function call and add the reference to the 
> appropiate
> objects.

Right.

> >We are actually using a thread to load the movie in the core lib already, 
> >with
> >assertion checking that the loader/parser thread doesn't mess with the 
> >garbage 
> >collector
> >at all.
> 
> Then what does it mean the
> assert(self == mainThread);
> in GC.h??

It means that the loader/parser thread is not allowed to create GC-managed 
objects.
And it's not, AFAIKT.
If we'll go multiple GC (one for each VM) then that assertion should check that
the thread creating the GC-managed object is the same that will run the 
collector
(if mainThread is set at GC creation time should be fine as it is).


--strk;