On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 07:13:53PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> I was in a museum a few days ago and one couldn't read the
> descriptions because of some artist's dumb low-contrast color choice.
> There should be a law against this! You guys are the reason stupid
> choleric persons invented genocides.
I u
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 05:44:50PM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
>
> On 7 Oct 2010, at 1:44 am, Wolf Tivy wrote:
>
> >Ok, I'm not sure I understand you on this one. What you are talking
> >about (killing apps) is not affected by my patch. If you mean that we
> >should filter repeats globally
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 05:41:24PM -0700, Wolf Tivy wrote:
> > In particular, XCheckIfEvent seems well suited to this situation-
> > -feed in a predicate which specifically finds the repeated KeyPress
> > (matches time, key, etc.). But this can perform unnecessary
> > computation since it checks th
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:44:46PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Wednesday, 22 September 2010, Wolf Tivy wrote:
> > I wasn't just being cheap when I left that out. It looks like XPeekEvent
> > blocks, which won't do. I haven't found the (hopefully existent)
> > non-blocking equiva
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 03:00:53PM -0700, Wolf Tivy wrote:
> I wasn't just being cheap when I left that out. It looks like
> XPeekEvent blocks, which won't do. I haven't found the (hopefully
> existent) non-blocking equivalent, so I can't even write that part.
Okay, I feel like a moron: I had no i
I suppose your goal was code economy, so maybe you don't care, but: by
not adding the code to deal with repeats, you're forcing the resulting
release/press pairs to be handled by the toplevel event loop, one
undoing the effect of the other.
Visually though it shouldn't be an issue: like I said, I
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 07:07:30PM +, Wolf Tivy wrote:
> That would suck. Good to know it can be done tho. I have heard of
> a way to turn off repeats, and I'll look into that before I do any
> nasty race-condition hacks.
The only mechanism I know of is what "xset r off" does, i.e. it is not
a
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 08:44:18PM -0700, Wolf Tivy wrote:
> [..]
>
> So does anyone know how to change the mode or something so that we can
> get the paired events instead of just 'keypress'? I know this is
> possible somewhere because that's how SDL does it.
You want the KeyRelease event. Not
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 10:58:19PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Paolo wrote:
> >>> Why program in C++ when you can do it in C, making the program
> >>> simpler and better?
> > When you can't make the program simpler and better, or you need to
> > do it faster than
