[Xcb] XCB I/O mechanism - Native win32 port

[Jeetu Golani]

Hey Barton,

> There's some other papers on XCB.  Dig around a little, and
> if you can't find them I'll dig them up.
>

Sure thing...will look around :)

> I'll post the code when I've talked to Jamey and gotten my
> head back on straight.
>

That'll be awesome. If I could have code that you used to test these scenarios 
under UNIX and test it under Windows we'd know straight off if it's behaving 
similarly or not. 

In the meantime I'll go about understanding the XCB code and working under the 
assumption that I'm porting straight off. Without any test code the only way 
to know for sure is to get this code to run.....does that make sense?

I look forward to your code......any other ideas would be appreciated :)

Bye for now



On Monday 31 Mar 2008, Barton C Massey wrote:
> In message <200803310936.34655.jeetu.golani at gmail.com> you wrote:
> > > The policy you'd need to implement are is fairly simple
> > > and well documented.
> >
> > Do you mean the X meets Z paper as the policy that should be implemented?
> > or is there other documentation? I don't know the Z structure and if
> > there's other documentation that would be great.
>
> There's some other papers on XCB.  Dig around a little, and
> if you can't find them I'll dig them up.
>
> All you really need to implement is a queue of replies that
> have not yet been requested by the client, so that when the
> client does request them they are available.  The client
> thread should be blocked until their reply arrives.
>
> > > The question as to which thread (or threads)
> > > wakes up when they are all blocked on a select() is
> > > important to our code, and as far as I know POSIX is silent
> > > on it. We measured several UNIX platforms and they all do
> > > the same thing, but does Windows?
> >
> > Any simpl enough code with which I could test pthreads-win32 and win32
> > which would answer your question above? Maybe the code you used to
> > measure on UNIX platforms??
>
> Heh.  I re-created that code and started playing with it,
> and am now kind of baffled by some apparently wrong
> assumptions I had apparently made. :-)
>
> I'll post the code when I've talked to Jamey and gotten my
> head back on straight.
>
>     Bart