Re: RFC: frame size hints

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 07:03, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 of December 2003 01:10, Rob Adams wrote:
> > Definitely should be "calculate".  Window managers implementing
> > approximations should document this is their respective COMPLIANCE
> > documents.
>  I object. I hope the previous messages in the thread have shown that it can 
> be a major pain to always get it right, if it's actually possible at all. 
> KWin simply cannot calculate it, it can only estimate.

OK.  I'm fine with describing the hint as an estimate.  Having a
standard way to get a decent estimate is way better than having nothing
at all.  And describing the hint as an estimate will probably mean that
more window manager authors will create best-effort implementations
rather than just ignoring the hint and declaring non-compliance.  Rob,
are you OK with this?

> Even Havoc said in one 
> message that the Metacity patch (which is the reference implementation for 
> this) is not guaranteed to get it right.

Yes, but FWIW, I believe it is possible to fix the implementation so
that the extents are always correct; the Metacity patch is just an
initial implementation of an admittedly difficult-to-get-really-right

> And I said already, I'd actually 
> prefer if the wording stressed more the fact that it can be just a guess.

OK, should I add an implementation note or something?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]