On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 19:40:46 -0700
Bryce Harrington <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 05:01:29PM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > Some times the compositor needs to send a configure request but without
> > having any clue about what size the surface should have. Examples
> > include unmaximizing a surface that was mapped as maximized, or an
> > initial state which doesn't have any size expectations.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Bryce Harrington <[email protected]>
> 
> > ---
> >  protocol/xdg-shell.xml | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/protocol/xdg-shell.xml b/protocol/xdg-shell.xml
> > index 84d39bb..f07ba5e 100644
> > --- a/protocol/xdg-shell.xml
> > +++ b/protocol/xdg-shell.xml
> > @@ -364,6 +364,11 @@
> >     about how its surface should be resized in window geometry
> >     coordinates. See set_window_geometry.
> >  
> > +   If the width or height arguments are zero, it means the client
> > +   should decide its own window dimension. This may happen when the
> > +   compositor need to configure the state of the surface but doesn't
> > +   have any information about any previous or expected dimension.
> > +
> >     The states listed in the event specify how the width/height
> >     arguments should be interpreted, and possibly how it should be
> >     drawn.

Can width and height be unknown independently? I suppose they could.

Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]>

Do implementations already work like this? If they do, then not a
reason for a version bump. If we know they don't, and we get these zero
dimensions emitted, that might be a reason to bump the version to avoid
really zero-sized windows (NULL buffers).


Thanks,
pq
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel

Reply via email to