array and enum attributes (Was: [PATCH] xdg-shell: add draw states for xdg_surface)

Yong Bakos junk at
Wed Jun 1 18:16:31 UTC 2016

On May 30, 2016, at 3:54 AM, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2016 08:39:59 -0500
> Yong Bakos <junk at> wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>> Regarding the combination of type="array" enum="foo"...
>>> On May 27, 2016, at 12:30 PM, Mike Blumenkrantz <michael.blumenkrantz at> wrote:
>>> I've inlined some replies below.
>>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 1:13 PM Yong Bakos <junk at <mailto:junk at>> wrote:
>>> On May 27, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Mike Blumenkrantz <zmike at <mailto:zmike at>> wrote:
>>>> this adds a method for compositors to change various draw attributes
>>>> for a surface
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mike Blumenkrantz <zmike at <mailto:zmike at>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jonas Ã…dahl <jadahl at <mailto:jadahl at>>
>>> Hi Mike & Jonas,
>>> A question about communicating default state, and some
>>> minor nits you can certainly ignore, inline below.
>>>> ---
>>>> unstable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell-unstable-v6.xml | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)
>>>> diff --git a/unstable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell-unstable-v6.xml b/unstable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell-unstable-v6.xml
>>>> index dfd7e84..0fa76d4 100644
>>>> --- a/unstable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell-unstable-v6.xml
>>>> +++ b/unstable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell-unstable-v6.xml
>>>> +
>>>> +        Calling this after an xdg_toplevel's first commit will raise a client error.
>>>> +      </description>
>>>> +      <arg name="states" type="array" enum="draw_state"/>
>>> Just a sanity check, since I haven't seen it in a protocol spec yet. Does scanner handle
>>> this combination of array and enum correctly?
>>> Good catch. This also affects the event above it.
>> As we discussed via IRC (27 May), the scanner will choke on this. While we talked about
>> making a change to the scanner to allow this, perhaps such a change doesn't make sense.
>> Given a type="array", scanner will generate a parameter of type wl_array.
>> Perhaps the short story here is to just remove the enum from this arg, and the similar
>> arg in the configure_draw_states event above. What do you think?
>> (I wonder if it's the DTD that can change, so the scanner's validation step
>> will catch the unsupported combination of type="array" enum="foo". My gut tells me that
>> DTDs don't support this logic, but I'll dig into this.)
> Hi,
> here is some background.
> A type="array" argument is really just a binary blob of data. The XML
> description, human documentation aside, does not specify anything about
> the blob contents. Therefore adding an XML attribute pointing to an
> enum definition is half-useless. Generators could use it for creating
> automatic links in documentation, but it cannot be used for code
> generation, because you don't know the types contained in the blob.
> We also do not want to add blob content type definitions to the XML
> language, because you might want to have everything C is able to
> express, including nested structs. There is also no requirement that
> the "array" is really an array - every "element" could be a different
> thing. It could be bitstream and whatnot. Only the use of
> wl_array_for_each() implies it is an array of similar elements,
> wl_array_add() does not.
> The big point in adding enum annotations was that language bindings
> generators (other than wayland-scanner) could use the annotation for
> code generation. I don't think it is possible with the array type.
> If we allow enum annotation with the array type, it will only be usable
> for doc links, unlike the other enum annotations.
> OTOH, we have lots and lots of places in the documentation texts that
> refer to some request, event, interface, etc. that would be useful as a
> hyperlink in the generated docs. Enums could fall into that as well, so
> we would not need the attribute for only documentation.
> Auke, Nils, what's your take on this matter?
> We do have some documentation about enums in
> Thanks,
> pq

Thank you for the info. Just so I understand your points correctly, let
me assert that /just/ making a minor change to scanner to not error on
the presence of both array and enum together does not have any major


Thank you,

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <>

More information about the wayland-devel mailing list