From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Thu Dec 8 11:39:18 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] WM_REPOSED implementation From: Odd Skancke To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: <439808C2.4030008@utbm.fr> References: <4397F4C3.7030701@utbm.fr> <1134035229.5776.50.camel@linuxbox> <439808C2.4030008@utbm.fr> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:36:17 +0100 Message-Id: <1134038177.5776.67.camel@linuxbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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=AWL, BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: tor, 08,.12.2005 kl. 11.19 +0100, skrev Olivier Landemarre: > > I have aready defined bit 1 in wisgr to NM_INHIBIT_HIDE. > > > Ok so I can't use it, do you have other define bit for this? > Arnaud can you add this in gemlib documentation? No, just bit 1 of wisgr in shel_write(SWM_NEWMSG,wisgr,...). > > Anyway, I do prefer keeping WM_REPOSED support in the way it is now. > >That is, in the correct context via wind_set(WF_OPTS), as this is an > >option specific to windows. In addition to that, wind_set(WF_OPTS) allow > >apps to set options like this on each single window instead of affecting > >all windows, if it chooses. It would allow us to let application like > >Taskbar that set NM_INHIBIT_HIDE to use wind_set(WF_OPTS) to allow the > >AES to hide only selected windows. > > > > Basically I think this; shel_write(SWM_NEWMSG,wisgr,...) should be used > >to indicate generic message types, which doesnt fall into categories > >like WM_xxx which are window messages. This is why AP_TERM is defined > >here, and this is why I added MN_INHIBIT_HIDE here. Other messages which > >fall into a specific category should be configurable via the relevant > >calls, to keep things neat and tidy :) > > > > What do you think? > > > > > I think a bit to tell WM_REPOSED is support can be put here, this is a > general config for windows, wind_set is for specific windows, here it > will be for all windows, more simple for applications. My point of view, > or we should add a wind_set() option to do general config if you prefer, > in this case windows number will have no effect. If you pass as handle a value of -1, wind_set(WF_OPTS, handle, wopt0, wop1, wop2) will make the selections apply on all windows the application opens hereafter, and can be regarded as 'generic window config'. So one initial wind_set(WF_OPTS, -1, ...) will accomplish the same as you propose above. As I think it is good to allow for such configuration on a per window basis, the cleanest way would be to use one function for all related things. I dont think giving two different calls the same meaning is a good thing, as this will most probably result in confusion. OK, the WM_REPOSED is perhaps not the best example on what I mean, since most apps either do or dont support it, so in majority of the cases this would be set via wind_set(WF_OPTS, -1,...) upon program start. Look into newcalls.txt and have a look at the wind_set(WF_OPTS) documentation if you want to find out more. This documentation is not complete yet, but better than nothing > I think we should ask to devloppers what they prefer, shel_write() or > wind_set(NEWMSG,..) specific. Yes, we should. But I dont think we should blindly accomodate their wishes :) Best Regards, Odd Skancke