Eamon Walsh wrote: > Peter Hutterer wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 03:46:26PM -0400, Eamon Walsh wrote: >> >>> Why don't we just not support returning XGE events from those old >>> functions ? >>> >> This was the alternative towards the end of the previous email. To quote: >> > >>>> The only other solution I could come up with so far is to add >>>> XGENextEvent() >>>> and friends as substitutes for XNextEvent & co. In this approach, >>>> XNextEvent >>>> _never_ returns generic events, leaving existing clients ABI-safe. >>>> XGENextEvent requires an argument of the cookie+data type. >>>> > > New API could be conceptually cleaner and not have the cookies at all, > just return a malloc'ed buffer. Even if you end up doing the cookie > thing, new API could bypass that and assume the caller will take care of > freeing.
As an alternative to new event API, wouldn't it be easier if applications were required to announce that they support generic events before event processing begins in order to receive generic events -- say by calling XGEInit(dpy). If we call XGEInit from XIQueryVersion, then no client code needs to be changed or recompiled. _______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
