On 25 February 2011 14:39, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 03:18:37PM +0200, Rami Ylimäki wrote: >> On 02/25/2011 02:48 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: >> >On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 02:08:38PM +0200, Rami Ylimäki wrote: >> >>Documentation of "C.2.1 XInitExtension" from Xlib manual says that >> >>the Xlib specific extension number in XExtCodes is connection >> >>specific, which makes sense, because the number is managed >> >>internally in Xlib and not asked from server. Then "C.5.11 Deriving >> >>the Correct Extension Opcode" says that a separate XExtCodes should >> >>be maintained for each connection. >> >> >> >>So I think that one shouldn't assume that opcodes stay the same, >> >>even though it seems to be so in practice. >> >Er, really? How would sending requests then work without an event from >> >the server telling you to round-trip and get the extension list again? >> > >> >> Looks like I removed a little bit too much context when answering. >> The original question was about whether one can trust that extension >> opcodes are the same between connections. The answer seems to be >> that there is no guarantee of that, because XExtCodes structure is >> connection specific. Of course the opcodes should stay the same over >> the lifetime of a connection but nobody guarantees, that >> XInitExtension returns the same opcodes for different connections, >> even though in practice it's so. > > Oh, right. Yeah, not guaranteed at all. >
Meaning there is no way to get the error name for an error code that's guaranteed to work? Thanks Michal _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
