<body><div id="__MailbirdStyleContent" style="font-size: 12pt;font-family: calibri;color: #000000">
Hi Dave,<div><br></div><div>if we get rid of all the global calls to "ActiveWorld", "World", and "ActiveHand" etc. in application code... we might start thinking about background cycles. Until then, it seems not quite possible. :)</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Marcel</div><div class="mb_sig"></div><blockquote class="history_container" type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px; margin-top:20px; margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;">
<p style="color: #AAAAAA; margin-top: 10px;">Am 12.11.2017 16:12:49 schrieb David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com>:</p>Thanks Bob, that is pretty much what I was guessing as well.<br><br>Dave<br><br><br>On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 10:24:28PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:<br>> I honestly don't know what it was intended for -- I never used it and <br>> can't see where anyone else did. If I were to hazard a guess, one might <br>> connect some remote users to a project and switch locally to another <br>> project and then call this method to allow the remote users to continue <br>> to interact with the project they started with and which you, locally, <br>> are not currently connected to. Just a guess, however.<br>> <br>> <br>> On 11/11/17 10:04 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:<br>> >Thanks Bob,<br>> ><br>> >I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project<br>> >works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended<br>> >to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be<br>> >"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with<br>> >that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind<br>> >#doOneCycleInBackground?<br>> ><br>> >Or am I reading too much into it?<br>> ><br>> >Dave<br>> ><br>> >On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:<br>> >>I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just<br>> >>updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in<br>> >>#doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running<br>> >>currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see<br>> >>any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.<br>> >><br>> >><br>> >>On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:<br>> >>>This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa<br>> >>>2001, and I<br>> >>>see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.<br>> >>><br>> >>>It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the<br>> >>>current project<br>> >>>to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am<br>> >>>envisioning<br>> >>>a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while<br>> >>>someone<br>> >>>elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another<br>> >>>project in<br>> >>>this same image.<br>> >>><br>> >>>Am I guessing right?<br>> >>><br>> >>>I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to<br>> >>>the<br>> >>>global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects <br>> >>>active<br>> >>>at<br>> >>>the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled<br>> >>>Project),<br>> >>>it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my<br>> >>>curiosity here.<br>> >>><br>> >>>It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that<br>> >>>appears<br>> >>>in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.<br>> >>><br>> >>>Dave<br>> >>><br>> >>><br>> ><br>> <br><br>> <br><br><br>
</blockquote>
</div></body>