> > Fvwm does not send any events to the application (well, almost, > there are some cases, but these don't play a role here). The X > server does it automatically. I'm sure the problem is timing > related: Fvwm receives *exactly* the same exents in both cases > and thus behaves the same. But wish interprets the events > differently. Since the outcome seems to be somewhat random, it's > very likely that timing plays a role. Applications should not be > written in a way that relies on a specific timing. > > Bye > > Dominik ^_^ ^_^ > > Since update wait's for all events of a certain type to be processed, this cannot be a timing problem. I have to repeat, this does work under other window managers, but I like fvwm the most. Using the described method is exactly the way it is proposed in many books/tutorials/wikits. Another reason might also be the *PENDING* flags of windows introduced after 2.2.5 (exept the MAP_PENDING), so that the X server sends events to wish in a different order. But I'm just guessing, I do not know the internals of fvwm well.
Gerhard -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
