Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
> Kris Leech wrote:
> > Good stuff, did you come across any issues with simpleIPC, Ive been
> > meaning to have a go with it for a while...
>
> I had two issues with simpleipc:
> - in unix the TSimpleIPCServer.OnMessage event is not fired. To
> override this, a solution is to call ReadMessage in the OnIdle event of
> the application.
Try this implementation:
========================
type
{ TPeekThread }
TPeekThread = Class(TThread)
private
FDoPeek: TNotifyEvent;
protected
procedure Execute; override;
procedure Synchronize(Method: TThreadMethod);
Property DoPeek: TNotifyEvent read FDoPeek write FDoPeek;
end;
{ TSimpleIPCpServer }
TSimpleIPCpServer = Class(TSimpleIPCServer)
private
FPeek: Boolean;
FPeekThread: TPeekThread;
procedure PeekMethod(Sender: TObject);
procedure SetPeek(const AValue: Boolean);
protected
Procedure Activate; override;
Procedure Deactivate; override;
published
Property Peek : Boolean read FPeek write SetPeek;
end;
implementation
{ TPeekThread }
procedure TPeekThread.Execute;
begin
repeat
FDoPeek(self);
until Terminated;
end;
procedure TPeekThread.Synchronize(Method: TThreadMethod);
begin
inherited;
end;
{ TSimpleIPCpServer }
procedure TSimpleIPCpServer.PeekMethod(Sender: TObject);
begin
if PeekMessage(1000,false) then
TPeekThread(sender).Synchronize(@ReadMessage);
end;
procedure TSimpleIPCpServer.SetPeek(const AValue: Boolean);
begin
if FPeek=AValue then exit;
if FActive then DoError(SErrActive,[]);
FPeek:=AValue;
end;
procedure TSimpleIPCpServer.Activate;
begin
inherited Activate;
if FActive and FPeek then begin
FPeekThread:=TPeekThread.Create(true);
FPeekThread.DoPeek:[EMAIL PROTECTED];
FPeekThread.FreeOnTerminate:=true;
FPeekThread.Resume;
end;
end;
procedure TSimpleIPCpServer.Deactivate;
begin
if FActive and FPeek then begin
FPeekThread.Terminate;
end;
inherited Deactivate;
end;
========================
BTW: Somebody know how to override a Classname, like it's possible with
Methods. i.e: TComponent = Class(TComponent); override;
> - The other is that there's currently no easy way to diferentiate
> between different message types. Let's say i need to send messages
> telling i started the job, send the results of the job and than finished
> the job. Currently there are two options: send a header in the stream
> with a numeric variable and check it when arrive (you lose the comodity
> of SendStringMessage) or you send a string with a string marker. I will
> propose a change in it (and provide the patch) where we could use the
> MessageType (user defined) to identify the message and we could still
> use SendStringMessage .
Or you could use another SimpleIPC connection.
> - another potential problem (not tested) is that in unix a file is used
> to pass the messages. So if the program crashes the file may not be
> deleted and would give that the server is running.
In unix it uses pipes. No problem when program crashes.
Thanks!
--
Al
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
