You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There are certain situations where one needs explicit ownership of the main loop. A good example of this is Cocoa API's which must be executed on strictly the main thread, inherently any GUI libraries that operate on OS X also have this requirement.
The goal is to expose control of the main loop to the user of the package, if they so desire.
I propose exposing a channel window.MainLoopChan over which arbitrary functions (which MUST be ran on the main thread) will be sent by running windows.
This would allow for a swift communication with the window package on-demand (i.e. when the window package doesn't need to execute functions, you don't execute any, in contrast to busy-waiting glfwPollEvents and things).
At least one problematic side effect of this is that we can no longer utilize go.mobile/app because it steals the main loop entirely.
Issue by slimsag
Saturday Nov 08, 2014 at 06:05 GMT
Originally opened as azul3d-legacy/gfx#39
There are certain situations where one needs explicit ownership of the main loop. A good example of this is Cocoa API's which must be executed on strictly the main thread, inherently any GUI libraries that operate on OS X also have this requirement.
The goal is to expose control of the main loop to the user of the package, if they so desire.
I propose exposing a channel
window.MainLoopChan
over which arbitrary functions (which MUST be ran on the main thread) will be sent by running windows.This would allow for a swift communication with the window package on-demand (i.e. when the window package doesn't need to execute functions, you don't execute any, in contrast to busy-waiting
glfwPollEvents
and things).At least one problematic side effect of this is that we can no longer utilize
go.mobile/app
because it steals the main loop entirely.See azul3d-legacy/issues#29 for previous discussion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: