[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev dev.16 patch 3 - SOURCE_CACHE etc.

From: Leonid Pauzner
Subject: Re: lynx-dev dev.16 patch 3 - SOURCE_CACHE etc.
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:57:04 +0300 (MSK)

9-Dec-99 20:34 Klaus Weide wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Leonid Pauzner wrote:

>> 9-Dec-99 06:30 Klaus Weide wrote:
>> > * Corrected line counting in HTDisplayPartial, taking into account offsets
>> >   used for the various variables being compared.

>> [This tiny calculations aren't so shape as we could think since having
>> two asynchronous processes one could get another read from the socket
>> while executing display_page() so HText_getNumOfLines() may be increased
>> then. We are working with the pessimistic estimation, though.

> But we don't have anything like asynchronous processes.  If we had, a *lot*
> of other changes would be necessary...
>> One could work from the optimistic estimation if moving
>> LYMainLoop_pageDisplay() call before NumOfLines_partial = HText_getNumOfLines
>> Does this have any sence?]

> Why would it make a difference?  LYMainLoop_pageDisplay() doesn't modify
> HTMainText->Lines afaics.  And of course it shouldn't.  So the order doesn't
> matter with the current state of affairs, right?  With "asynchronous 
> processes"
> (I assume you mean threads) accessing the same HText structure - well that's
> so far from what we have now that all bets are off (or I'm not thinking as
> far ahead as you).

No threads. When we have several inputs and several outputs - idle
states are possible while waiting the device. Depending on OS/compiler
that could be done asynchronous, I am not sure this is the case but at
least in theory. Here we have input from the socket and output to the
screen. Well, seems the output is cached so this is not the case, you
are right.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]