[maemo-developers] gtkmozembed: why kill itself in destructor?
From: Marius Gedminas marius at pov.ltDate: Wed Jan 14 18:43:38 EET 2009
- Previous message: gtkmozembed: why kill itself in destructor?
- Next message: gtkmozembed: why kill itself in destructor?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 02:27:04PM +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote: > ext Zhihai Wang wrote: > > Deal all, > > > > In EmbedPrivate.cpp, > > > > EmbedPrivate::~EmbedPrivate() > > { > > sWindowList->RemoveElement(this); > > sWidgetCount--; > > mNeedFav = PR_FALSE; > > if (mProgress) > > mProgress->Shutdown(); > > if (mEventListener) > > mEventListener->Shutdown(); > > mOwningWidget = nsnull; > > if (sWidgetCount) return; > > gboolean bval = FALSE; > > if (gtk_moz_embed_common_get_pref > > (G_TYPE_BOOLEAN,"gtkmozembed.no_destroy_on_last_window", &bval) && bval) > > return; > > int pid = getpid(); > > EmbedCommon::DeleteInstance(); > > EmbedGlobalHistory::DeleteInstance(); > > kill (pid, SIGUSR1); > > kill (pid, SIGKILL); > > } > > > > Why shall we kill pid in the end? Can't the program exit normally? > > AFAIK it can be quite a bit faster. > > Normal process exit goes through a lot of destructor code, > freeing things that are anyway freed by the operating system > when process terminates. Browser is threaded, so maybe that > the destructors use locking too... That's what the _exit() function from <unistd.h> is for, isn't it? Marius Gedminas -- "Don't trust a statistic you haven't faked yourself." -- Seen in another posting by Markus Kuhn -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/attachments/20090114/a7301982/attachment.pgp
- Previous message: gtkmozembed: why kill itself in destructor?
- Next message: gtkmozembed: why kill itself in destructor?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]