[Xr] What happended to the idea of getting rid of the xrs argument?

Robert Wittams robert at wittams.com
Tue Jun 3 13:37:49 PDT 2003


On Tuesday 03 June 2003 05:11, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> Is this dead or not? I still feel it would be a very good idea. I
> need to know what kind of outcome we can expect from this as it
> affects whether fltk will use Xr or not. If the argument is required
> then I must write a wrapper function for every Xr function, in which
> case I may as well retain back-compatability. If the xrs argument is
> deleted then I will change the interface to match Xr exactly, in the
> hope that program can really call Xr in the future.

I really thought this had died, but anyway.... 
I'm sorry, but you aren't making much sense. 
If you really want to have the XrState as a global variable, then have 
it as a global within FLTK. Although that would be stupid too. 

Every X lib call takes a Display* and a Drawable argument. 
How the hell did you deal with those in FLTK if you can't keep track of 
one pointer? 

The idea for a toolkit library is to keep the xrs argument in whatever 
representation of a widget you have. Or, if you want to be lazy, you 
could create a new one every time you got an expose event, out of the 
Drawable integer handle you must already have. This really isn't rocket 
science. 

Rob




More information about the cairo mailing list