On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:01:53PM -0700, Bill Spitzak wrote:
>
>
> On 03/09/2015 11:41 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:13:20 -0700
> >Bill Spitzak wrote:
> >
> >>On 03/09/2015 06:34 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >>
> >>>What performance concerns do you have?
> >>
> >>I suspect
On 03/09/2015 11:41 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:13:20 -0700
Bill Spitzak wrote:
On 03/09/2015 06:34 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
What performance concerns do you have?
I suspect the worry was about allocating and freeing a temporary array,
but your idea of the caller pa
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:13:20 -0700
Bill Spitzak wrote:
> On 03/09/2015 06:34 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>
> > What performance concerns do you have?
>
> I suspect the worry was about allocating and freeing a temporary array,
> but your idea of the caller passing the array avoids it.
>
> I feel
On 03/09/2015 06:34 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
What performance concerns do you have?
I suspect the worry was about allocating and freeing a temporary array,
but your idea of the caller passing the array avoids it.
I feel like it would be better to reduce the number of arguments to only
a s
Hi,
On 9 March 2015 at 07:49, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 17:20:37 -0800
> Bryce Harrington wrote:
>> However, I suspect this API would be better named as
>> wl_global_find_first().
>>
>> A more general wl_global_find() I would expect to be returning a list of
>> results.
>>
>> O
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 01:51:27 -0700
Bryce Harrington wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 09:49:19AM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 17:20:37 -0800
> > Bryce Harrington wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:30:57AM -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> > > > Which of the 4 arguments
On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 09:49:19AM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 17:20:37 -0800
> Bryce Harrington wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:30:57AM -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> > > Which of the 4 arguments do you use for your use case?
> > >
> > > Because this can only return
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 17:20:37 -0800
Bryce Harrington wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:30:57AM -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> > Which of the 4 arguments do you use for your use case?
> >
> > Because this can only return the first match I suspect some of the
> > NULL tests are pretty useless, beca
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:30:57AM -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> Which of the 4 arguments do you use for your use case?
>
> Because this can only return the first match I suspect some of the
> NULL tests are pretty useless, because you have to specify arguments
> that you know will return the one a
Hi,
On 23 February 2015 at 16:36, Jonny Lamb wrote:
> Il 23/02/2015 17:28, Derek Foreman ha scritto:
>> On 23/02/15 10:02 AM, Jonny Lamb wrote:
>>> The intention here is to be able to find an existing wl_global using
>>> some search parameters and then get some information about it.
>>
>> I'm not
Il 23/02/2015 17:28, Derek Foreman ha scritto:
On 23/02/15 10:02 AM, Jonny Lamb wrote:
The intention here is to be able to find an existing wl_global using
some search parameters and then get some information about it.
I'm not sure I see a need for this, but if there is need there should
also
On 23/02/15 10:02 AM, Jonny Lamb wrote:
> The intention here is to be able to find an existing wl_global using
> some search parameters and then get some information about it.
I'm not sure I see a need for this, but if there is need there should
also be documentation. :)
> ---
> src/wayland-serv
The intention here is to be able to find an existing wl_global using
some search parameters and then get some information about it.
---
src/wayland-server.c | 33 +
src/wayland-server.h | 4
2 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/wayland-server.c
13 matches
Mail list logo
