Re: Merging new VCL scheduler feature branch

On 27.10.2016 20:39, Michael Meeks wrote:
>       Interestingly - I also see a large number of SfxItemDisruptor_Impl
> items in the scheduler debug - which is curious. Possibly some problem
> in the (legacy) manual linked-list logic ?

FYI those are a recent addition from this change which removed some
indirection:

ommit 22c75d86db9351ab271942a755a2a75a76920943
Author:     Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com>
AuthorDate: Wed Jul 27 20:55:45 2016 +0200

    sfx2: just use Idle in SfxItemDisruptor_Impl

    This Application::InsertIdleHdl() stuff is ancient and now obsolete.

of course i never checked how many of these would pile up so i hope
"large number" isn't too large to cause new performance issues.

> commit 5abe75596c3df7fdf100533856361a7ed007f561
> Author: Jan-Marek Glogowski <glogow@fbihome.de>
> Date:   Thu Sep 8 06:55:30 2016 +0200
>
>     Revert all SalYieldResult changes => bool
>
> -SalYieldResult SvpSalInstance::DoYield(bool bWait, bool
> bHandleAllCurrentEvents, sal_uLong const nReleased)
> +bool SvpSalInstance::DoYield(bool bWait, bool bHandleAllCurrentEvents,
> sal_uLong const nReleased)
>
>       * Really dislike that - please just make the enum more
>         descriptive to express what is going on.
>       * The enum having only two values - but being descriptive
>         is good.
>       * I can't tell what DoYield returns from the above signature, or
>         where to look to find that out.
>       * I fear the previous mess of '!' operators, and unclear
>         booleans and re-use of this result - which made the
>         original code really, really hard to follow (for stupid
>         people like me).

i'd like to join your haters-of-meaningless-bools club.