From: Mattia B. <mb...@ds...> - 2002-06-05 20:16:00
|
> Thanks Mattia, that example is great. I wouldn't have been able to > figure that out myself. > > I think you should make this the standard example because the current > one does not make sense in a real programming situation. I already thought that. Now in the TODO... > On that subject, I was reading the archives and it appears that Julian > and Vadim were originally discussing the usefulness of wxSplashscreen > without multi-threading. Julian released the code because he was > successful without threading. So, Splashscreen is an exception to other > widgets. The demo should explain that. If people can't get it to work, > they won't use it. I don't understand the relation between the elements of this phrase: what Vadim and Julian discussed is that if something covers and them uncovers the splash screen, you'll get a square full of garbage, because there is no thread active to dispatch paint events ( this happens for example with MSVC 5 ); AFAIR Julian just said that it worked in the common case, and there were no plans for having an event pump thread in wxWindows, so that what the best thing achievable at that moment. Given this, I don't understand why splash screen is an exception... ah, maybe that you can use it even without an event loop? This is not ( completely ) true. Anyway, it does not matter, since people just want to show a splash screen, without caring about the internals ;-) Regards Mattia |