ANNOUNCE - graphics package

Peter-Henry Mander erlang@REDACTED
Tue Jan 20 13:08:25 CET 2004

Sounds like two distinct problems, please explain why they're the same (if they are).

I think Joe's problem is to maintain consistency between what is visible on screen, and what the Erlang data structures contain, i.e. the user kills a window (maybe forcefully) but ex11 isn't aware the window has gone. The windows don't unexpectedly vanish (I hope!)

Am I correct Joe? I would expect some form of event or notification in this context. My knowledge of X11 is not all that good, so I'm probably babbling.

The erlang-gtk thing sounds like a garbage collection issue, i.e. how to keep window handles within the reachable memory set. If the window reference is no longer reachable, it get garbage collected and probably destroyed.


On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 13:23:32 +0200 (EET)
Taavi Talvik <taavi@REDACTED> wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Joe Armstrong wrote:
> > > The parent-child-sibling organisation of Xwindow maps neatly into
> > > processes. If ex11 can become a concurrent set of loosly coupled
> > > Xwindows mapped as processes, I reckon that designing new widgets will
> > > become easy enough not to require a huge library if canned widgets
> > > that we generally see in most windowing environments.
> > Yes - this is *exactly* how I'm building things. The only problem is
> > garbage collecting the windows and graphics context etc when you
> > kill the windows.
> I had similiar problem - garbage collecting destroyed gtk+ widgets,
> when implementing yet another erlang-gtk+ binding with pipe driver
> (
"The Tao of Programming
 flows far away 
 and returns 
 on the wind of morning."

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list