From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Sat Mar 19 00:22:08 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] wind_get/set mode From: Odd Skancke Reply-To: ozk@atari.org To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: References: <200502012146.p44237@b.maus.de> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:16:59 +0100 Message-Id: <1111187820.10453.56.camel@fedora> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: ozk@atari.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: Hello, fre, 18,.03.2005 kl. 22.27 +0100, skrev Arnaud BERCEGEAY: > Hello, > > Sorry for my late answer. The discussion was about the constant: No problem :) I think most of us knows the lack_of_time problem... > > #define WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH 13 > > we introduced in XaAES and MyAES. > > The point is that some applications used that value (when it was > undefined) : the application checks the error code returned by the AES > when invoking wind_get(13), and then the application deduces from the > error code returned if the AES supports "modern" wind_set/get extensions. > > It seems that for now, some applications use that feature to test the > availability of WF_OWNER. > > On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 21:46:00 +0100, Gerhard Stoll > wrote: > > > AB> then this old application may believe that WF_OWNER is not supported > > AB> by this AES. > > > > The application can believe that no new wind_get/set mode is present. > > Please remember that the only legal way to check if new wind_get/set() > mode is present is by calling appl_getinfo(). > > All modern applications should use appl_getinfo() instead of the > wind_get(13) hack. Definately. < ... > > To sum up, i would vote to keep WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH as is (value already > supported by MyAES and XaAES at the moment). > > If someone think it's really a bad idea to keep WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH=13, then > speak now. I'd like to release a new version of gemlib, with > WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH defined inside... and then other pieces of software will > use that value too. Then, it will be very hard to change WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH > to another value. I also think we should keep it as is. And I do wonder what applications use wind_set(13) hack... would be nice to know so one could check for sure what happens... Best regards, Odd Skancke