download_chunk(buffer, 1024); // this takes time...
{
- // ensure noone reads m_data while we write it
+ // ensure no one reads m_data while we write it
wxCriticalSectionLocker lock(m_dataCS);
memcpy(m_data+offset, buffer, 1024);
offset += 1024;
Finally, you should try to use wxCriticalSectionLocker class whenever
possible instead of directly using wxCriticalSection for the same reasons
- wxMutexLocker is preferrable to wxMutex - please see wxMutex for an example.
+ wxMutexLocker is preferable to wxMutex - please see wxMutex for an example.
@library{wxbase}
@category{threading}
*/
void Enter();
+ /**
+ Try to enter the critical section (same as trying to lock a mutex).
+ If it can't, immediately returns false.
+
+ @since 2.9.3
+ */
+ bool TryEnter();
+
/**
Leave the critical section allowing other threads use the global data
protected by it. There is no error return for this function.
@section thread_types Types of wxThreads
There are two types of threads in wxWidgets: @e detached and @e joinable,
- modeled after the the POSIX thread API. This is different from the Win32 API
+ modeled after the POSIX thread API. This is different from the Win32 API
where all threads are joinable.
- By default wxThreads in wxWidgets use the @b detached behavior.
+ By default wxThreads in wxWidgets use the @b detached behaviour.
Detached threads delete themselves once they have completed, either by themselves
when they complete processing or through a call to Delete(), and thus
@b must be created on the heap (through the new operator, for example).
A common problem users experience with wxThread is that in their main thread
they will check the thread every now and then to see if it has ended through
IsRunning(), only to find that their application has run into problems
- because the thread is using the default behavior (i.e. it's @b detached) and
+ because the thread is using the default behaviour (i.e. it's @b detached) and
has already deleted itself.
Naturally, they instead attempt to use joinable threads in place of the previous
- behavior. However, polling a wxThread for when it has ended is in general a
+ behaviour. However, polling a wxThread for when it has ended is in general a
bad idea - in fact calling a routine on any running wxThread should be avoided
if possible. Instead, find a way to notify yourself when the thread has ended.
performance issues on those systems with small default stack since those
typically use fully committed memory for the stack.
On the contrary, if you use a lot of threads (say several hundred),
- virtual adress space can get tight unless you explicitly specify a
+ virtual address space can get tight unless you explicitly specify a
smaller amount of thread stack space for each thread.
@return One of: