On 14/02/2015 11:17 , Bill Spitzak wrote: > > > On 02/13/2015 04:46 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: >> On 14/02/2015 05:00 , Bill Spitzak wrote: >>> Actually, more to the point, it sounds like the client is unable to >>> distinguish the BTN_LEFT produced by the pointer from the BTN_LEFT >>> produced by the pad. >> >> the caller can tell what event caused the button. >> >>> If in fact it *can* be distinguished then there should be some very >>> similar api to this "has" function. For instance if there is some >>> sub-device id sent with the events then this function should take that >>> same sub-device id. >> >> what sub-device ID? we don't have subdevices, that was an idea that was >> floated for a while and obsoleted by the device group. > > Sorry for being vague. But what I am saying is that if "the caller can > tell what event caused the button" then something says whether the event > is from the pointer or from the pad. What I am thinking is that this > "has" function should take the same information so that you can ask > whether the pointer or the pad has the button.
isn't that exactly what the patch does? Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
