kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just for clarification I think Tom was commenting that the changes hurt
the zone filling speed.  @Tom, is that what your were commenting on earlier?

On 3/1/2018 10:11 AM, Jeff Young wrote:
> But then the progress reporter won’t work (and you’ve got no way to cancel).
> 
> Non-pooling parallel threads are sufficient for zone filling, aren’t they?
> 
> 
>> On 1 Mar 2018, at 15:00, Bernhard Stegmaier <stegmaier@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> For now it would probably be fine to just restore the pragma for the for loop optimisation.
>> Mac users are used to work single-threaded, all others would get back multithreading here.
>>
>>> On 1. Mar 2018, at 15:58, Tomasz Wlostowski <tomasz.wlostowski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/03/18 15:43, Jeff Young wrote:
>>>> The purpose is it works on Mac.
>>>>
>>>> But it does appear I misread the std::max( omp_get_num_procs(), 2 ) part.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Jeff!
>>>
>>> Be aware that neither std::thread nor std::async have any concept of
>>> thread pooling - we need to look for a suitable library or write or own.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>