From what I can tell, in Python and and Django, signals are simply delegated events. Is there anything that functionally differentiates them from the typical notion of events in C#, Java, ActionScript, etc?
+3
A:
Signals typically have an association with an operating system facility and events are typically application-defined. In some technology stacks, the OS-level stuff may be hidden well enough that there isn't a difference in the API, but in others perhaps not.
Ben Collins
2009-03-09 02:47:44
+1
A:
You might as well ask "Why aren't events simply called signals?". Differences in terminology happen.
Logan Capaldo
2009-03-09 02:49:20
Moreover, I believe that "signals" has precedence.
dmckee
2009-03-09 02:53:42
It wasn't really a terminology question, I specifically asked if there was some sort of functional reason why the were named differently.
Soviut
2009-03-09 03:11:29
How is that not a terminology question? "Why don't these things that are the same have the same name?"
Logan Capaldo
2009-03-09 03:22:30
If you read the body of the question, and not the title, it is very clear, I'm asking whether there's a difference in functionality.
Soviut
2009-03-09 07:09:42
+2
A:
Afaik Qt had the first signal/slot implementation. Qt's docs explain the metaphor: "A signal is emitted when a particular event occurs". The distinction is so subtle that the nomenclature has been blurred.
Dustin Getz
2009-03-09 02:51:10
+15
A:
Actually, "signals" have been around longer than events have. In the earliest usage, a signal was an asynchronous way for processes to get notified that events had occurred. Since Unix is much older than Django (and since a lot of the Django work came from pydispatcher, where the original stuff was done), the name has stuck.
Events are really signals, you might say!
John Feminella
2009-03-09 02:52:18