[Lazarus] Threads in Lazarus code base

Marc Weustink marc.weustink at cuperus.nl
Wed Sep 15 11:28:55 CEST 2010

Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2010, Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
>> On Wednesday 15 September 2010 11:48:09 Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>> Threads are a thing of the past as well. I've been programming threads
>>> since years. There is nothing exciting about them, mostly they are a
>>> pain.
>> Correct but now there is no better way to implement parallelism. I
>> know some
>> languages have new syntax for it which is actually exciting. Maybe
>> some day
>> FPC will support such syntax but that is future. Now is now.
> Well...
> IMHO the whole threading model is basically flawed, but currently there
> is no other alternative. At least not in any language I know.
>>> Programming threads is error-prone, and needs careful design of your
>>> classes. I doubt that the lazarus IDE is very thread-safe, and
>>> therefor I
>>> think that the lazarus devels do not enable threading by default.
>>> This is also why the UseCThreads is there. There is no need to drag in
>>> thread support if you don't use it: it creates additional dependencies
>>> which you simply don't need if you don't program using threads.
>> Yes but now I want to use it. I don't care if other parts of the IDE are
>> "thread-safe". My thread is running only when the user is reading one
>> settings
>> dialog and it is done in a safe way. It simply makes the program better.
>> What would you suggest? How to commit the code so that we don't get
>> complaints
>> about RunErrors?
> This is a question the lazarus devels must answer. I just provided a
> possible hypothesis why currently they don't use it :-)

In my experience, if you don't need them don't use them just for the fun 
of it. This makes coding and debugging way easier.

In case of lazarus, what do you want to do in a thread ?


More information about the Lazarus mailing list