pfPassChanData :-(

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Robert Webb (robertw++at++wormald.COM.AU)
Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:23:13 +1000 (EST)


Hi Performer-people,

In my application pfPassChanData() doesn't seem to be doing quite what it
should :-( I have two modes which I can toggle between with the hit of a
key:

Mode 1:
    Channel 1: Calls pfDraw() once.
    Channel 2: Turned off.

Mode 2:
    Channel 1: Calls pfDraw() once.
    Channel 2: Calls pfDraw() twice.

When I hit the key, the chan-data for channel 1 changes and I call
pfPassChanData() to make sure it gets sent down the pipeline to the DRAW
process. However I am printing out the value of the data passed to my draw
call-back (from within that call-back) and after a few hits of the key, it
starts changing between the value it should have (for the current mode), and
the value it should have in the other mode. I have a printf at every call
to pfPassChanData(), so I know it is NOT being called unless I hit the key,
but still the data being passed to the draw call-back is oscillating between
two different values. It is as if Performer is still using an older copy of
the chan-data sometimes, rather than the new one I asked to pass down.

Has anyone heard of this sort of behaviour before? I am also using a
different draw-mask for channel 1 in the two different modes, if that makes
a difference. And the problem only happens in multiprocess mode, NOT when I
run in a single process. I am using Performer 1.2.

Thanks in advance,
Rob.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 _
|_) _ |_ _ ._ _|_ \ / _ |_ |_ robertw++at++wormald.com.au
| \(_)|_)(/_| |_ \/\/ (/_|_)|_)o

"Informer, you no say daddy me Snow me I'll go blame, a licky boom boom down"
                                                                - Snow.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:51:41 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.