On Wednesday 21 September 2005 21:32, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > On Sep. 21, leeming wrote: > > However, the implementation of these functions (for Qt 3.3.4) suggests > > that we should perhaps be calling "unlock(false)". Can you see if that > > makes any difference?
> I am not sure what you mean. It never got to the unlock() for me in the > first place. I had to remove the check for locked(). You mean that the call to locked() resulted in a SIGSEGV? My misunderstanding; I assumed that the crash was happening in unlock(). Anyway, trying to unlock a mutex that is already unlocked will result in undefined behaviour when using POSIX threads. See, for example Section 3.3.2 "Locking and unlocking a mutex" of "Programming with POSIX threads" by David R Butenhof. So, I'm not going to apply your fix; sorry. > Or do you mean to add those QApplication::locked and QApplication::unlock > functions? If so, should I add them to same src/frontends/qt2/lyx_gui.C > file? No, I was just showing you their implementation in Qt 3.3.4. Regards, Angus
