On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 09:47:25AM +0000, Ross Burton wrote: > XNextRequest in libX11 is a pointer dereference and an increment, where > your XCBNextRequest is a round-trip. I've mentioned in a previous mail, but just to be clear: No, it isn't a round-trip. While this XCBNextRequest macro is hackish, it's not completely awful. > There must be a better way than this. That, I'll readily agree with. :-) > I see that the XLib/Xcb layer has a xcb_get_request_sent() function that > returns the latest sequence number sent. Can this, or something > similar, be used instead? That does only slightly less work than xcb_no_operation, and is in the portion of XCB's API that I desperately hope nobody will use besides Xlib itself. It is, admittedly, public, but if some piece of functionality can be achieved no other way than by using xcb_get_request_sent, then let's please talk about why. --Jamey p.s. Just in case someone wants to lecture me on providing public API and then asking people not to use it: Yes, I know the history of Xlibint.h; we have carefully designed xcbxlib.h to have as little API as we could get away with in order to make Xlib work. If people use these three functions it at least won't be a complete disaster.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature