From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Mon Apr 17 19:08:24 2006 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Message-ID: <1145293368.4443ca38d6ec4@webmail2.utbm.fr> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:02:48 +0200 From: "olivier.landemarre@utbm.fr" To: mint@fishpool.com Subject: Re: [MiNT] wind_set(WF_TOPMOST) extension References: <200604171528.p46480@b.maus.de> In-Reply-To: <200604171528.p46480@b.maus.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.8 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: Olivier.Landemarre@utbm.fr Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: 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=2.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: * Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-508.st.uni-magdeburg.de id k3HH8OsX028158 Quoting Gerhard Stoll : > > extension to previous documentation > > Is there a public place where anybody can get what you have change/new in > MyAES? Actually not, in fact there is no new API in MyAeS that it is not in XAAES so already documented (WF_FIRSTAREAXYWH and appl_getinfo for name AES are for a long time already put in XAAES), there is nothing more (except two extension of wind_set(230 and 231) not very important that I use internaly and should probably document one day). Other changes are only bugs and new user features I do patch all the days, list is too long and ininteresting I think. > > > this to appl_getinfo(), because this is not enough generic > > Why? All the time we add a feature we add a bit somewhere, it should be documented and all aees should implement it. For only a new mode in wind_set() or wind_get(), if we add 50 new mode (we can dream). This quite fastidious for a programmer to look in all flags, I think we could add a generic mode test in this functions to have an universal test, that not depend of any bit somewhere. If we can imagine a wind_get() return 0 for an error, I can't imagine how test wind_set() correctly, probably you prefer know what come before use the function. I think easier, is to do this test with an id window like -2 (or an other) never use to have this answer. Of course this test, we should add one time more a flag in appl_getinfo() but it will be the last for any extension of wind_set() wind_get(). > > > I think we should add a call in wind_set() or wind_get(), to know if a > > mode exist like > > This is not necessary, see my news form 12 Jan 2005. I have look about this, I'm not sure it work alway's, and how do you do with wind_set()? I will think about your test. > > Gerhard Regards Olivier