[Xcb] XML description of GLX conditional reply lists
jamey at minilop.net
Wed Nov 29 11:09:19 PST 2006
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 08:07:40AM -0500, Jeremy Kolb wrote:
> I hate those requests so much.
Hehe. I'm composing a mail about XKB; GLX is nothing. ;-)
> As far as I know they're the only ones with this format... I'm not
> sure we want to change the XML just for these functions.
What do we want the XML to do? I think right now we want it to describe
the protocol as fully as needed to generate C code, because we don't
have anyone actively contributing requirements here on anything but the
C binding. Currently the XML can't correctly describe GLX: it claims
there's one list element when there isn't. However, the XML is still
quite flexible, so maybe all we want is something like a
stupidglxgetlistfromfield="datum" attribute on the list element.
And how much convenience should the C binding provide? Bart generally
argues that XCB should support common C idioms and feel reasonably
natural to C programmers. I'm not opposed to that policy, but it's more
important to me that it support direct and predictable access to the
protocol, and that its interface is minimal and orthogonal. In this
case, making the list return more natural doesn't in any way prevent
directly examining the protocol response and doesn't really change the
API, so I'm for it.
Randr1.2 was a different case, in my mind, because the protocol could be
adequately described for a sufficient C binding already. As we add more
language bindings, I expect the XML will grow accordingly, and we may
add things like subevent codes then.
> A glx utility library might be a nice thing to have for these and
> other functions...
I think currently that library is called "Mesa". ;-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20061129/75d14b7f/attachment.pgp
More information about the Xcb