asynchronous comunication, wxPython and threads.
zunbeltz at gmail.com
Tue Jun 21 16:54:01 CEST 2005
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Toby Dickenson wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 June 2005 14:22, Zunbeltz Izaola wrote:
> I guess you are accessing the socket from both your GUI thread and
> communications thread. Dont do that. An action in the GUI thread should
> signal the communictions thread, then the communictions thread talks to the
I see ..., Could be the problem that the socket is created in the GUI
thread? the function that end the theraded function (abort())
set want_abort = True
This make the Measurement() function to return. The Measurement()
funtion is called by startmeasurement() which is the threaded funciton.
After aborting i execute a function that FinalizeMeasuremnt() that
does comunication to some adjustament in the machine. Maybe i have to move
this portion to the threaded funtion.
> Using non-blocking sockets in the GUI thread may cause the opposite problem to
> the one that led you to use threads in the first place: a blocking operation
> in the GUI may freeze the communications. Maybe that isnt a problem for you.
> If it is, I suggest sticking to two threads.
Yes, i think i have to stick to two threads.
> If you are talking to only one device, then using blocking sockets is a good
> approach. However Ive never written an application like this that didnt need
> to support a second (or third) machine sooner or later, and three
> communictions threads is starting to get ugly. A framework like Twisted will
> let you handle many machines in the one thread, but it still makes sense to
> keep a second one for the GUI.
I didn't get this. What do you do when you have more tham one device; use thread or use
Twisted? Did you use it whit wxPython. I think thereis some problems of compatibility.
Thank you very much.
More information about the Python-list