On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Jonas Ådahl <jad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 04:46:55PM +0200, Arnaud Vrac wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm wondering if a behaviour of weston related to subsurfaces is either a > > bug or intended. The protocol description is not clear on what happens in > > the following cases: > > > > Suppose I have a shell surface (BLUE) and two subsurfaces (RED, GREEN). I > > want to stack them to I get RED, GREEN, BLUE from bottom to top. > > > > If I do: > > > > wl_subsurface_place_below(GREEN->subsurface, BLUE->surface); > > wl_subsurface_place_below(RED->subsurface, GREEN->surface); > > > > It works, but if I do: > > > > wl_subsurface_place_below(RED->subsurface, GREEN->surface); > > wl_subsurface_place_below(GREEN->subsurface, BLUE->surface); > > > > The order is GREEN, RED, BLUE instead. > > > > Logically the sibling relative order should be kept in the second case, > but > > it's not. The protocol is not clear on what should happen, what is the > > expected result ? > > The protocol says "This sub-surface is taken from the stack, and put > back just above the reference surface, changing the z-order of the > sub-surfaces." Considering this, if you first placed a surface below > another, placing again, that relationship may have been broken by the > new operation. In other words, the "tree" is not moved, just the > subsurface you placed. > Alright, thanks for the clarification. The current implementation makes sense then. -- Arnaud Vrac
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
