On Dec 31, 2007 4:45 AM, Vincent Torri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is this stuff properly documented? We really should make it a > > requirement to not let any new code / changes into CVS without the > > proper documentation. > > after a discussion with devilhorns on irc, it seems that no composite > calls are used in e17, so I would say that it's useless (for now) to know > if the composite extension is available or not. > > about knowing if composite is available, see: > > http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xorg/proto/compositeproto.git;a=blob_plain;f=compositeproto.txt > > section 7. > > about ecore_x_screen_is_composited, see: > > http://standards.freedesktop.org/wm-spec/wm-spec-1.4.html#id2512311 >
Thanks for the links, but that is really not my point here. My point is that if someone walks in and tries to figure out what these functions really do, there's no way of doing so (unless you consider reading the source code then jumping over to the FDO documentation a good way). What I'm trying to say is that we need to have some form of code documentation policy in this project of ours. Stuff that is going to make its way into cvs should be properly documented (and when needed, commented) so both developers of the libraries and people using the libraries can figure things out with a minimal amount of hassle and code grepping. -- Hisham Mardam Bey http://hisham.cc/ +1-514-713-9312 Codito Ergo Sum (I Code Therefore I Am) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
