[Xr] Dealing with groups in Xr

Owen Taylor otaylor at redhat.com
Thu Apr 24 09:08:34 PDT 2003

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 10:32, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Apr 24, Owen Taylor wrote:
>  > It strikes me that making the user worry about the bounding
>  > box of primitives drawn onto the temporary group is wrong; if creating
>  > larger empty pixmaps becomes a time or memory bottleneck, it can
>  > certainly be optimized out, at the cost of a moderate amount
>  > of complexity. (For instance, with a tiled representation of the
>  > surface.)
> Good point. I think we're close to understanding what the three new
> functions should do now. And we just need the names...
>  > Just as a thought, perhaps Enter/Leave is better than Push/Pop?
>  > Push/Pop seems to indicate tat
> Owen, did you forget to finish this thought? I'm curious what you were
> going to say.

"... to indicate that there is a stack that is separate from the 
 XrSave/XrRestore stack"

> I'd at least like a name that suggests that the groups can be nested
> and I don't know if Enter/Leave does that for me, (though I'm not sure
> why). Maybe Begin/End?

Hmm, Enter/Leave seems very nesting-friendly to me - you go inside
one, you go inside another. But in the end, I don't have a strong
feeling between the alternatives I wouldn't put up a big fight
against any of Push/Pop, Enter/Leave, Begin/End.


More information about the cairo mailing list