Hi, On 3 October 2011 06:06, Jeremy Huddleston <jerem...@apple.com> wrote: > On Oct 2, 2011, at 16:30, Peter Hutterer wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 10:52:03AM -0700, Jamey Sharp wrote: >>> And I think ldexp is a much better idea than either. :-) It's more >>> clear, and as an added bonus, probably faster. (You can multiply a >>> double by a power of two just by adding the exponents. Division by an >>> arbitrary constant is stupidly slow by comparison.)
True! >>> To me, the interesting part of Jeremy's question was whether helper >>> functions are worthwhile for these conversions, >> >> yes. Indeed, I'd missed that, sorry. >>> and if so, where they should live. >> >> preferably not in in the protocol. it exposes us to more bugs in the >> protocol headers (which in theory should be static). And since they're >> built-in updating them in case a bug is found is harder, you'll need to >> rebuild anything that uses the headers, simply updating the component isn't >> enough (that's from a distro POV). >> >> tbh, that's one case where I'd accept duplicate implementations in the >> server and libX*. > > Yeah, with my port maintainer hat on, a bug in a proto header like that would > be *incredibly* annoying to push out. I like the idea of them living as > static functions in libXi and the server. Sounds good to me. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel