On 18 August 2017 at 13:14, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:23:46 +0100 > Emil Velikov <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 27 July 2017 at 14:36, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:56:20 +0100 >> > Emil Velikov <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> From: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> Unlike most other scanner users, the core wayland interfaces are >> >> public ally available via the libwayland DSO. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >> >> --- >> >> Makefile.am | 2 +- >> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am >> >> index d0c8bd3..4055d04 100644 >> >> --- a/Makefile.am >> >> +++ b/Makefile.am >> >> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ nodist_libwayland_client_la_SOURCES = \ >> >> pkgconfig_DATA += src/wayland-client.pc src/wayland-server.pc >> >> >> >> protocol/%-protocol.c : $(top_srcdir)/protocol/%.xml >> >> - $(AM_V_GEN)$(MKDIR_P) $(dir $@) && $(wayland_scanner) code < $< > $@ >> >> + $(AM_V_GEN)$(MKDIR_P) $(dir $@) && $(wayland_scanner) >> >> --object-type=shared code < $< > $@ >> >> >> >> protocol/%-server-protocol.h : $(top_srcdir)/protocol/%.xml >> >> $(AM_V_GEN)$(MKDIR_P) $(dir $@) && $(wayland_scanner) server-header >> >> < $< > $@ >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > looks good, but I wonder if the header commands need the type set as >> > well to avoid the warning. >> > >> My goal was to have the option only for "code", but it seems like the >> scanner will throw a warning when client/server-header instances are >> missing it. >> >> I could omit the warning or simply add have --object-type throughout >> the Makefile, for consistence. > > Hi Emil, > > right. The only argument one way or another that I can think of for now > is that it might be slightly more future-proof if all scanner > invocations used the same set of options. That way if we need something > in headers based on object-type, users would already be set. But I > can't think of what it might be so it's a very weak argument. > Hey Pekka,
Fully agree: consistency and keeping it futureproof (future capable really) sounds like a good idea. I'll do so with v2 of the series. -Emil _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
