Re: Standardizing _METACITY_UPDATE_COUNTER

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Sat, 2004-02-21 at 15:20, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>  Hmm. Could somebody please explain to me why this actually has to use XSYNC 
> counter? I might be wrong, but it seems to me that the KWin patch actually 
> doesn't check the value of the counter, it simply stops the timeout and does 
> another move/resize when it gets notification about counter update. I 
> remember I wondered a bit about this, but it makes sense to me:

The main feature XSync adds is the ability to block on the counter -
something window managers probably don't want to do. I guess you can
also with XSync say "add one to counter" instead of just "set property
to N", but as we're ignoring the values and only the client updates this
is probably not useful. Another hypothetical advantage of XSync counters
is that they can be bound to vertical retrace and other such things.

Anyway, I don't see how XSync extension is currently adding much here,
but my memory may be fuzzy. There was an original thread about the
update counter when I'd just implemented it, maybe I said then why I
used the extension ;-)

Havoc