[Xcb] New libxcb and xcb-proto releases (code name: "Oh, shit")

Uli Schlachter psychon at znc.in
Mon Nov 18 11:45:41 PST 2013

On 18.11.2013 17:25, Peter Harris wrote:
> On 2013-11-18 11:09, Ran Benita wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 03:45:09PM +0100, Uli Schlachter wrote:
>>> - We are renaming things in xcb_ge_event_t (this time on purpose). How are
>>>   people supposed to deal with it so that they work both with old and new
>>>   libxcb? There doesn't seem to be a #define which could easily be used for
>>>   deciding if pad0 or extension is the right field to use.
>> [Can always use the version string, no?]
> How about leaving xcb_ge_event_t alone, mark it deprecated in the docs,
> and adding an xcb_genericevent_event_t (possibly even via the xml, as
> originally proposed) that has the correct name for the extension field?
> Yeah, it's clutter, but it's just a struct definition so it's not like
> it bloats the output binaries.

I like this idea, however I didn't like the proposed name. I would propose
xcb_ge_generic_event_t (aka GeGeneric in XML-speak), because it (technically)
belongs to the GE extension and is generic (= one of many possible) event from it.

Attached are patches to implement this, what do you think?

- Buck, when, exactly, did you lose your mind?
- Three months ago. I woke up one morning married to a pineapple.
  An ugly pineapple... But I loved her.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Rename-ge-events-to-GeGeneric-events.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1058 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20131118/6726cda0/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Revert-Remove-xcb_ge_event_t-from-xcb.h.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1665 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20131118/6726cda0/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the Xcb mailing list