[Xcb] xcb-util compiling problems

Barton C Massey bart at cs.pdx.edu
Wed Mar 11 10:48:48 PDT 2009


In message <eaa105840903110915pef9bcd8t59598efa76dd85c6 at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Barton C Massey wrote:
> > I'm no longer convinced that we took the right road by
> > getting rid of the enums. =A0They were mostly helpful, and I
> > hate losing them in xcb_image. =A0Could someone please explain
> > to me again why the enums needed to die?
> 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2009-February/004364.html and thr=
> ead.
> 
> In order to get XCB_WINDOW_NONE as a constant, we ended up with enum
> xcb_window_t, which conflicts with the xidtype xcb_window_t.
> 
> My preference at the time was for renaming enum xcb_window_t to
> xcb_window_enum or similar.
> 
> Now I think I'd prefer a "white list" of old enum names that would
> continue to be named _t, with new enums named with _enum or similar.
> 
> Thoughts?

First, my apologies: I was really wrong back in
February. :-)

My current preference would be to do xcb_window_enum_t for
just the ones that are altenum, and leave non-altenums
as-is.  We know that this won't collide on any existing
stuff, and I'd be surprised if it did on new stuff.

Does this make sense?

    Bart


More information about the Xcb mailing list