[wayland HiDPI support, posible regression?]

[Jasper St. Pierre]

"dumb" clients also include X11 clients for legacy Xwayland compatibility.
Of which there a lot of.
On Mar 16, 2015 8:35 PM, "microcai" <microcai at fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> on Monday 16 March 2015 20:28:48，Daniel Stone wrote：
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 16 March 2015 at 00:35, Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Bill Spitzak <spitzak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >> [blah blah blah]
> > >>
> > >> Events seem to be ok, but my complaint is that a large number of
> > >> coordinates in the api other than events are in integer logical
> pixels,
> > >> not in high dpi or in fixed-point. The offsets to attach are the
> biggest
> > >> culprits. There are also integer clip rectangles in the subsurface and
> > >> scaling apis. Except for compatibility there is no reason positions in
> > >> messages cannot be in buffer pixels.
> >
> > 'Except for compatibility', yeah. That's like saying that there's no
> > reason for me to have a job, except for the need to house and feed
> > myself. Kind of a showstopper, that.
> >
> > Smart clients do not require buffer scaling. The scaling is there as a
> > fallback to make clients who are blissfully unaware of the constraints
> > of high-DPI screens still work: no more, no less. Clients who have the
> > smarts to deal with resolution/DPI-independence will _already_ be
> > doing smart layout which avoids the need for buffer scaling.
>
> any client *has to be* smart client anyway. buffer scalling is such
> pointless.
>
>
> >
> > Any talk of throwing away buffer scaling (breaking dumb clients) in
> > order to fit the uses of clients who already today avoid buffer
> > scaling, is utterly pointless. Any attempt to handwave away the
> > disadvantages as nonexistent is disingenuous.
> >
> > > Please do not take a thread started by someone who is obviously
> > > confused and side-track it into a discussion of things that you think
> > > are design-flaws in the current protocol.  This is not the appropriate
> > > place for a discussion of wl_surface.attach (x, y) coordinate systems
> > > and bringing that up only adds to the confusion.
> >
> > Yes, exactly.
> >
> > Yet again, this is something you have repeatedly brought up every time
> > something even tangentially related is mentioned. You've explained
> > your concerns over and over, and it's obvious that our opinions differ
> > and upstream will not change. Doing this makes it infinitely less
> > likely that your concerns will be taken seriously (cf. the
> > wl_keyboard_grab bug): the first reaction to seeing your name come up
> > in a thread is 'oh god, not again'. Which is a shame, as you do have
> > valuable input to offer, but it's drowned out by the amount that you
> > bang on about your pet peeves, with a total inability to accept that
> > someone with a differing opinion may just have a different opinion,
> > not be objectively wrong. Everyone loses: you don't get taken
> > seriously, we get frustrated, discussions get derailed, and people who
> > don't know better mistake your loud pronouncements for upstream's
> > actual position (or, when those differ from measurable reality rather
> > than opinion, a useful fact).
> >
> > Be the signal, not the noise.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20150316/c0867ef0/attachment.html>