in the simulation of WaitMessage(), we should use QS_POSTMESSAGE instead of QS_ALLEVENTS. According to the documentation , WaitMessage returns control to the calling thread when "a new message is placed in the thread's message queue". This is consistent with the QS_POSTMESSAGE parameter .  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms644956%28VS.85%29.aspx (w32)  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms961244.aspx (wince) Right now, what we have is going to be return more often than needed.
Created attachment 373798 [details] [diff] [review] patch v.1
Assignee: nobody → doug.turner
Attachment #373798 - Flags: review?
Hrm, are you sure about this? QS_POSTMESSAGE is basically going to ignore most input, paint etc. messages, which I'm pretty sure WaitMessage() won't.
yeah, weird huh. we tried this patch, and it is terrible; dropping event.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.