[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: PATCH: Asynchronous filtering
From:       Zack Rusin <zack () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-10-31 0:36:03
[Download RAW message or body]

On Saturday 25 October 2003 10:30, Don Sanders wrote:
> Finally the patch introduces use of the new Thread Weaver class to
> make the filter through action async. Perhaps Till would like to give
> more info on this.
>
> Basically before moving on to making filtering of incoming mail async
> I'd like to get what Till and I have been working on committed and
> tested.
>
> I would haved like to get incoming mail filtering async, and on IRC
> Ingo proposed a method that means it shouldn't be too much more work
> but I have personal obligations tomorrow which will prevent me from
> getting that done this weekend.

You guys didn't get a lot of input on the patch itself, besides a few 
"threads are bad" and "threads rule" emails and since my bitchy self 
finally got some time I tell you why suck and rule at the same time. 
Please give me one more day to give you a decent review, though.
As to the other comments, at the moment I despise threads because I've 
spent the last week trying to get to work a multithreaded app that had 
paths that were supposed to be accessed by few threads at a time and 
then did all the yielding with semaphores. No fun. I agree with most of 
the stuff Marc said. Considering that we're forking anyway, threads 
aren't really necessary but after looking at the patch is looks very 
sane. And since it's not like we have options in the "asynchronous 
filters" arena I'd be all for it. 

Zack

-- 
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone,
but they've always worked for me
_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]