On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
> Dismantling R_runHandlers is indeed opening interesting perspectives.
Quite so. Obviously someone should rewrite R's event loop. Someone else.
> Callbacks are the Achilles tendon, I suspect.
> I had an independent locking mechanism for f
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>> I couldn't find that one incantation when I looked for it:
>> R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(1, 1));
>>
>> I change it to
>> R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(0, 1));
>> because of
>> h
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
> I couldn't find that one incantation when I looked for it:
> R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(1, 1));
>
> I change it to
> R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(0, 1));
> because of
> https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/
I couldn't find that one incantation when I looked for it:
R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(1, 1));
I change it to
R_runHandlers(R_InputHandlers, R_checkActivity(0, 1));
because of
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2003-August/027281.html
It is working on OS X as well.
Tha
Attached patch redoes process_revents (again); now it actually *works*
on Unix (and I believe OS X, though someone should check). Which is
nice.
To test:
>>> r("plot(1:10)")
# window will appear
# move the window around, resize it, etc.; it won't update
>>> ri.process_revents()
# window will redra
