zzag added inline comments.
INLINE COMMENTS
> inputmethod_interface.cpp:128-129
> + wl_resource_destroy(resource->handle);
> + if (resourceMap().isEmpty())
> + q->deleteLater();
> + }
Destroy `q` in zwp_input_method_context_v1_destroy_resource(). In the
destructor request, we usually want to destroy only the resource.
> inputmethod_interface.cpp:181
> +
> +class Q_DECL_HIDDEN InputPanelSurfaceInterface::Private : public
> QtWaylandServer::zwp_input_panel_surface_v1
> +{
We need to destroy the wl_resource for zwp_input_panel_surface_v1 when the
associated surface is destroyed.
> apol wrote in inputmethod_interface.cpp:179
> I don't know, just looked at it and it doesn't seem that useful?
zwp_input_panel_surface_v1 defines a surface role (based on weston code) so it
should be a subclass of SurfaceRole. In long term, we want to do something like
SurfaceRole *role = SurfaceRole::get(surface);
if (role) {
wl_resource_post_error(resource->handle, ZMY_SHELL_SURFACE_ERROR_ROLE,
"Cannot reassign surface role"); // DIE!
return;
}
> apol wrote in inputmethod_interface.cpp:199-200
> I would rather not, otherwise when implementing private members they read
> like local variables.
Frameworks' policies have no a single word about this so I guess it's okay(?)
to put `m_`. I asked to drop `m_` because Qt folks seem to prefer not to put
`m_` in private classes.
I would appreciate if you bring this topic up to the discussion in
#kde-frameworks-devel since we're not consistent with naming in private classes.
REPOSITORY
R127 KWayland
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D27338
To: apol, #kwin, #frameworks
Cc: zzag, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, cblack, GB_2, michaelh, ngraham,
bruns
