Home > Archive > PERL POE > January 2006 > POE::Wheel optimizations
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
POE::Wheel optimizations
|
|
| Martijn van Beers 2006-01-24, 7:12 pm |
| Hi,
after discussion on irc, it was concluded that the POE::Wheel code was
being too careful when switching things like filters. So I've written
a patch (attached) that corrects this. I'm posting here so people with
all the optional modules (I'm missing Socket6, Gtk and Tk at least)
can see if it passes tests for them too before it gets committed.
Martijn
| |
| philip@awale.qc.ca 2006-01-24, 7:12 pm |
|
On 24-Jan-2006 Martijn van Beers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after discussion on irc, it was concluded that the POE::Wheel code was
> being too careful when switching things like filters. So I've written
> a patch (attached) that corrects this. I'm posting here so people with
> all the optional modules (I'm missing Socket6, Gtk and Tk at least)
> can see if it passes tests for them too before it gets committed.
Do you switch filters so often that it needs to be optimized? If so,
maybe you have a bad design. Too careful is a Good Thing.
-Philip
| |
| Martijn van Beers 2006-01-25, 8:01 am |
| On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 17:40 -0500, philip@awale.qc.ca wrote:
> On 24-Jan-2006 Martijn van Beers wrote:
>
> Do you switch filters so often that it needs to be optimized? If so,
> maybe you have a bad design. Too careful is a Good Thing.
No, it has nothing to do with needs from me (or my code). We were just
discussing wheels on irc, and found out the wheels had two mechanisms
to make sure it was using the right filter after that got switched. And
they were totally redundant. So removing one seems like the sane thing
to do to me.
Martijn
|
|
|
|
|