David Dawes wrote:
Sounds like a good plan.I think the problem in this particular case is lack of agreement about the nature of the pointer accleration problem and/or its solution. If those interested in solving the problem can discuss it here and come to some agreement on what the true nature of the problem is, and come up with a fix that solves it, then the code will get changed. Churning the code by committing each personal preference solution that gets submitted doesn't solve the problem (and that's how I'd characterise most of the submissions that actually contained patches that I've seen on this topic so far).David
How about this: I think that the polynomial function, when given good values for "Resolution" and "exponent", solves all the mouse acceleration problems that people have been complaining about. The real problem that I see is that it's hard to find good parameters (and that none of it is documented).
So, could everyone interested try playing with the power-function version of the mouse acceleration algorithm (like I explained in my previous post) and find good parameters for "Resolution" and the power function's N/D exponent? If it's possible to get a good acceleration function using specific values of these parameters, we can work on finally solving this issue by making it easy to modify those parameters.
BTW, be sure that that you're setting threshold to zero -- else you will be using the 2-step threshold-multiplier version of the acceleration algorithm (which sucks no matter what parameters you give it).
_______________________________________________
Xpert mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
