[waffle] [PATCH 07/10] waffle: add full screen window request

[Emil Velikov]

On 22 April 2015 at 20:26, Chad Versace wrote:
> On Fri 10 Apr 2015, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> On 09/04/15 22:48, Chad Versace wrote:
>> > On Mon 30 Mar 2015, Frank Henigman wrote:

>> >> diff --git a/include/waffle/waffle.h b/include/waffle/waffle.h
>> >> index 297a487..df0218e 100644
>> >> --- a/include/waffle/waffle.h
>> >> +++ b/include/waffle/waffle.h
>> >> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ enum waffle_enum {
>> >>
>> >>     WAFFLE_WINDOW_WIDTH                                         = 0x0310,
>> >>     WAFFLE_WINDOW_HEIGHT                                        = 0x0311,
>> >> +    WAFFLE_WINDOW_FULLSCREEN                                    =
>> >> 0x0312,
>> >
>> > wcore_enum_to_string must be taught about the new enum.
>> >
>> Hi Chad,
>>
>> Should one wrap the new enum in #if WAFFLE_API_VERSION >= 0x1070 ? Or it
>> only makes sense for new entry points into the waffle library ?
>> Considering that WAFFLE_WINDOW_{WIDTH,HEIGHT} went in without the API
>> guard, I'm leaning towards the latter.
>
> I'm unsure. Other libraries that use feature test macros, what do they
> do? For the record, when adding WAFFLE_CONTEXT_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE and
> WAFFLE_CONTEXT_DEBUG, I guarded those with 0x0130. But I'm open to
> guarding only entry points if that makes more sense.
>
That's the key that brought us here in the first place ;-) From a
quick look at my /usr/include all of the feature test macros are used
to guard structs (be that new ones or ABI changes) and functions
prototypes. Haven't seen one guarding enums/defines.

> I think we should research what other libraries do before committing to
> a decision.
>
Personally I would opt for dropping the guards in enums
 - GDK, xfixes, jpeglib guards only structs/functions,
 - anyone can provide a dummy/invalid value, it's up-to the API to
disregard/ignore it :-)

>> Speaking of which what is the status of waffle_display_print_info() ?
>> Mostly curious than anything else.
>
> I CC'd you today on the relevant thread.
My humble question has served its purpose - the discussion is back on :-)


Cheers
Emil