ae at op5.se
Fri Mar 16 03:32:48 PDT 2012
On 03/16/2012 05:54 AM, yan.wang at linux.intel.com wrote:
> I may destroy (Hide) and re-construct surafce (show) to achieve this
> point. But I think we may have 2 reasons to implement show/hide:
> 1. It may reduce unnecessary cost when switch frequently.
Not really, since "destroy" in this case just means that the client says
"don't paint this!". The client's request to wayland to destroy a window
really is a "hide" event. What the client does with the buffer that
contains the image painted where the window was is irrelevant to wayland.
> 2. re-construct surface may have to restore some user data. If wayland
> could do this, it could avoid application to save additional data.
Not really. Wayland paints things from images that the client (application)
handles. Though I imagine this will be done by frameworks 99.9% of the time,
that's hardly relevant. Wayland is not a key/value storage for applications
to put data in, and hidden window's can't receive events (transparent ones
can, but destroyed/hidden ones can't), so there's no data that wayland would
care about that the application can be saved from saving, so to speak.
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson at op5.se
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
More information about the wayland-devel