Hi, On 23 August 2012 08:40, Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 05:47:12PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote: >> This patch adds one configuration option, "DebounceDelay", and one XInput >> property, "Evdev Debounce Delay". They refer to the amount of time to wait >> after receiving a mouse button release event from the kernel before posting >> the event to the X server. If a mouse button pressed event is received before >> the delay expires, then the release/press pair is forgotten. This allows to >> deal with mice whose button switches are worn out or dirty. Each mouse button >> is debounced independently. > > Just reading the description, I think this is the wrong way round. Why not > let the first event through unconditionally and then discard the second one > if it arrives within the time frame. This wouldn't require a timer, instead > you could note the time the last event arrived and then act on that.
Huh? The problem is when you have a press-pause-release pattern which is actually sent as press-release-press-release-press-release. So, you want to suppress the inner release/press. > Having said that, I'm really hesitant on this feature. The reason you > stated is "mice whose button switches are worn out or dirty". Is the cost of > replacing (or cleaning) said device not a lot less than writing the code and > maintaining it? How many devices are actually affected by this? It's not just that, it's also wireless mice with flaky connections and a few other cases. Admittedly the hardware is definitely getting better and this is less of a problem than it used to be, but I think it's worth pushing anyway. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
