[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 


More information about the cairo mailing list