Re: Review: FULLSCREEN_MONITORS Hint

[Lubos Lunak <l lunak suse cz>]

On Wednesday 05 of March 2008, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 06:55:25PM -0800, Grant Patterson wrote:
> > Dana Jansens wrote:
> > >There are no other data.l[] elements, only 5.  That said, the data.s[]
> > > elements should be more than enough and allow for more things to be
> > > added in the future, but I realize every other hint exclusively uses
> > > data.l[].  Anyone else have an opinion about this?
> >
> > I like the idea of using the 16-bit elements so there's room for
> > expansion. While I can't see any reason for this now, there might be some
> > flags an app would want to set to further define window manager behavior.
> > Changed.
>
> Oh, please don't, there are enough bizarre and surprising
> inconsistencies in the X world as it is.  (And this would require a
> whole new special case in at least my code.)

 Huh?

> If you want future expandability, without using a new atom, then do it
> properly -- mark some fields as "if this field is non-zero, then
> discard the event" and some as "if this field is non-zero, then
> pretend the field is zero anyway", all that complex cruft.

 Sorry, but this surely is a joke? Especially after calling a relatively nice 
and clean solution bizarre?

> Alternatively, just accept that the way we do future expansion is by
> adding a new, extended atom, a la _NET_WM_STRUT{,_PARTIAL}...

 Yeah, really annoying that with all the ways for easy extensibility of the 
spec some people had the strange urge to check for exact properties size :(.

-- 
Lubos Lunak
KDE developer
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: l lunak suse cz , l lunak kde org
Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
Czech Republic       http//www.suse.cz